Investigating the effectiveness and acceptability of oral health and related health behaviour interventions in adults with severe and multiple disadvantage:Protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review

Increasing numbers of people in England experience homelessness, substance use, and repeated offending (known as ‘severe and multiple disadvantage’; SMD). Populations experiencing SMD often have extremely poor oral health, which is closely inter-linked with high levels of substance use, smoking, and poor diet. This study aims to undertake an evidence synthesis to identify the effectiveness, resource requirements, and factors influencing the implementation and acceptability of oral health and related health behaviour interventions in adults experiencing SMD. Two systematic reviews will be conducted using mixed-methods. Review 1 will investigate the effectiveness and resource implications of oral health and related health behaviours (substance use, smoking, diet) interventions; Review 2 will investigate factors influencing the implementation of such interventions. The population includes adults (≥18 years) experiencing SMD. Standard review methods in terms of searches, screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal will be conducted. Narrative syntheses will be conducted. If feasible, a meta-analysis will be conducted for Review 1 and a thematic synthesis for Review 2. Evidence from the two reviews will then be synthesised together. Input from people with experience of SMD will be sought throughout to inform the reviews. An initial logic model will be iteratively refined during the review.</jats:p

Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study

Background: There is evidence that cancer survivors are at increased risk of second primary cancers. Changes in the prevalence of risk factors and diagnostic techniques may have affected more recent risks.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Methods: We examined the incidence of second primary cancer among adults in the West of Scotland, UK, diagnosed with cancer between 2000 and 2004 (n = 57,393). We used National Cancer Institute Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results and International Agency for Research on Cancer definitions of multiple primary cancers and estimated indirectly standardised incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Results: There was a high incidence of cancer during the first 60 days following diagnosis (SIR = 2.36, 95% CI = 2.12 to 2.63). When this period was excluded the risk was not raised, but it was high for some patient groups; in particular women aged &#60;50 years with breast cancer (SIR = 2.13, 95% CI = 1.58 to 2.78), patients with bladder (SIR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.19 to 1.67) and head &#38; neck (SIR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.67 to 2.21) cancer. Head &#38; neck cancer patients had increased risks of lung cancer (SIR = 3.75, 95% CI = 3.01 to 4.62), oesophageal (SIR = 4.62, 95% CI = 2.73 to 7.29) and other head &#38; neck tumours (SIR = 6.10, 95% CI = 4.17 to 8.61). Patients with bladder cancer had raised risks of lung (SIR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.62 to 2.88) and prostate (SIR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.72 to 3.30) cancer.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Conclusions: Relative risks of second primary cancers may be smaller than previously reported. Premenopausal women with breast cancer and patients with malignant melanomas, bladder and head &#38; neck cancers may benefit from increased surveillance and advice to avoid known risk factors

Second primary cancer risk -the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study

Abstract Background: There is evidence that cancer survivors are at increased risk of second primary cancers. Changes in the prevalence of risk factors and diagnostic techniques may have affected more recent risks. Methods: We examined the incidence of second primary cancer among adults in the West of Scotland, UK, diagnosed with cancer between 2000 and 2004 (n = 57,393). We used National Cancer Institute Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results and International Agency for Research on Cancer definitions of multiple primary cancers and estimated indirectly standardised incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI)

Exploring Interventions to Improve the Oral Health and Related Health Behaviours of Adults Experiencing Severe and Multiple Disadvantage: Protocol for a Qualitative Study with Stakeholders

The number of individuals in England experiencing homelessness, substance use, and involvement with the criminal justice system is increasing. These issues, referred to as severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD), are often interlinked and co-occur. Health inequalities, particularly poor oral health, persist for those facing these inter-related issues and are closely linked with high levels of substance use, smoking, and poor diet. However, evidence for interventions that can improve these health outcomes for those experiencing these issues is limited. This paper outlines the design of a qualitative study which aims to explore the perspectives of stakeholders to understand what interventions can help to support SMD groups with their oral health and related health behaviours (i.e., substance use, smoking, diet). Interviews and focus groups will be undertaken with stakeholders comprising two groups: (1) individuals with experience of SMD, and (2) service providers (staff and volunteers), policy makers, and commissioners who support such individuals. Public involvement and engagement is central to the project. For example, stakeholders and research partners in policy and practice and people with lived experience of SMD will provide input at all stages of this study. Findings from the study will inform an ‘evidence for practice’ briefing outlining recommendations for policy. Dissemination will occur through presentations to a range of practice, policy and academic beneficiaries, and through peer-reviewed publications