20 research outputs found
Effectiveness of interventions to improve health behaviours of health professionals : A systematic review
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve the health behaviours of health professionals.
Design Systematic review.
Data sources Database searches: Medline, Cochrane library, Embase and CINAHL.
Review methods This systematic review used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to compare randomised controlled trials of health professionals, published between 2010 and 2021, which aimed to improve at least one health behaviour such as physical activity, diet, smoking status, mental health and stress. Two independent reviewers screened articles, extracted data and assessed quality of studies and reporting. The quality of articles was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment tool and the completeness of intervention reporting was assessed.
Outcome measures The outcome assessed was change in behaviour between intervention and control groups from baseline to follow-up.
Results Nine studies met the eligibility criteria, totalling 1107 participants. Health behaviours targeted were mental health and stress, physical activity, and smoking cessation, physical activity and nutrition. Six interventions observed significant improvements in the health behaviour in the intervention compared with control groups. Seven of the studies selected in person workshops as the mode of intervention delivery. The quality of the included studies was high with 80% (7/9) graded as moderate or strong.
Conclusions Although high heterogeneity was found between interventions and outcomes, promising progress has occurred across a variety of health behaviours. Improving reporting and use of theories and models may improve effectiveness and evaluation of interventions. Further investigation is needed to recommend effective strategies.
PROSPERO registration number CRD42021238684
Harnessing the NEON data revolution to advance open environmental science with a diverse and data-capable community
It is a critical time to reflect on the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) science to date as well as envision what research can be done right now with NEON (and other) data and what training is needed to enable a diverse user community. NEON became fully operational in May 2019 and has pivoted from planning and construction to operation and maintenance. In this overview, the history of and foundational thinking around NEON are discussed. A framework of open science is described with a discussion of how NEON can be situated as part of a larger data constellation—across existing networks and different suites of ecological measurements and sensors. Next, a synthesis of early NEON science, based on >100 existing publications, funded proposal efforts, and emergent science at the very first NEON Science Summit (hosted by Earth Lab at the University of Colorado Boulder in October 2019) is provided. Key questions that the ecology community will address with NEON data in the next 10 yr are outlined, from understanding drivers of biodiversity across spatial and temporal scales to defining complex feedback mechanisms in human–environmental systems. Last, the essential elements needed to engage and support a diverse and inclusive NEON user community are highlighted: training resources and tools that are openly available, funding for broad community engagement initiatives, and a mechanism to share and advertise those opportunities. NEON users require both the skills to work with NEON data and the ecological or environmental science domain knowledge to understand and interpret them. This paper synthesizes early directions in the community’s use of NEON data, and opportunities for the next 10 yr of NEON operations in emergent science themes, open science best practices, education and training, and community building
Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19
IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.
Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022).
INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes.
RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570
Experimental evaluation of teaching recursion in a video game
Copyright © 2009 by the Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee
Burnout and staff turnover among certified nursing assistants working in acute care hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic
Introduction Healthcare worker burnout is a growing problem in the United States which affects healthcare workers themselves, as well as the healthcare system as a whole. The goal of this qualitative assessment was to understand factors that may lead to healthcare worker burnout and turnover through focus groups with Certified Nursing Assistants who worked in acute care hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Eight focus group discussions lasting approximately 30 minutes each were held remotely from October 2022–January 2023 with current and former Certified Nursing Assistants who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic in acute care hospitals. Participants were recruited through various sources such as social media and outreach through professional organizations. The focus groups utilized open-ended prompts including topics such as challenges experienced during the pandemic, what could have improved their experiences working during the pandemic, and motivations for continuing or leaving their career in healthcare. The focus groups were coded using an immersion-crystallization technique and summarized using NVivo and Microsoft Excel. Participant demographic information was summarized overall and by current work status. Results The focus groups included 58 Certified Nursing Assistants; 33 (57%) were current Certified Nursing Assistants and 25 (43%) were Certified Nursing Assistants who no longer work in healthcare. Throughout the focus groups, five convergent themes emerged, including staffing challenges, respect and recognition for Certified Nursing Assistants, the physical and mental toll of the job, facility leadership support, and pay and incentives. Conclusions Focus group discussions with Certified Nursing Assistants identified factors at individual and organizational levels that might contribute to burnout and staff turnover in healthcare settings. Suggestions from participants on improving their experiences included ensuring staff know they are valued, being included in conversations with leadership, and improving access to mental health resources
Questionnaires that measure the quality of relationships between patients and primary care providers: a systematic review
BackgroundInternational guidance on models of care stress the importance of good quality, continuous patient-provider relationships to support high quality and efficient care and hospital avoidance. However, assessing the quality of patient-provider relationships is challenging due to its experiential nature. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review to identify questionnaires previously developed or used to assess the quality of continuous relationships between patients and their provider in primary care.MethodsMEDLINE, PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and SCOPUS databases were searched for English language studies published between 2009 and 2017. Key terms used identified studies conducted in the primary care setting examining relationships between patients and providers. Studies that focused on the conceptualisation, development, testing or review of a questionnaire, or studies that used a questionnaire for assessing the quality of continuous relationships between patients and providers were eligible. Studies that did not assess quality via a questionnaire, only assessed single aspects of relationships, only assessed single encounters, assessed transitions between settings or assessed relationships using an index were excluded. Information on validity testing of each relevant questionnaire identified from articles was reviewed to inform recommendations for future research and evaluation.ResultsTwenty-seven studies met the eligibility criteria, including 14 unique questionnaires. The questionnaires were diverse in length, scope, focus and level of validity testing. Five questionnaires were considered not feasible for future use due to size and lack of development work. Three questionnaires were considered strongest candidates for use in future work based on being relevant to the topic and primary care setting, freely available in English and not needing additional pilot work prior to use. These three questionnaires were the Care Continuity Across Levels of Care Scale, the Nijmegan Continuity Questionnaire and the Patient-Doctor Depth of Relationship Tool.ConclusionsThis study provides an overview of 14 unique questionnaires that have been used to assess the quality of continuous relationships between patients and primary care providers. The decision to use one of the questionnaires in future work requires careful consideration, including the scope, length, validation testing, accessibility of the questionnaires and their alignment with the initiative being evaluated
Evaluating assessment processes aimed at empowering student dietitians on professional placement
How effective are dietitians in weight management? A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs
Physical activity counselling and referrals by general practitioners for prostate cancer survivors in Australia
Physical activity is an important component of standard care to ensure quality of life for prostate cancer survivors. This paper describes the frequency of physical activity management (physical activity counselling or referrals) by GPs for prostate cancer survivors. A secondary aim is to explore GP characteristics that may influence physical activity recommendations, such as GP or patient age, GP gender and GP geographical location. Analysis was conducted using the longitudinal survey data from the Bettering the Care and Evaluation of Health (BEACH) study. Consultations where prostate cancer was managed, but not classified as a new problem or associated with palliative care, were included. GPs provided physical activity recommendations at 2.0% (n = 58/2882) of prostate cancer survivorship management contacts. The physical activity management provided was physical activity counselling on 39 occasions and a physical activity referral on 19 occasions. All physical activity referrals were made to physiotherapy. After controlling for potential confounding factors, results showed that younger GPs used physical activity management at four-fold the rate of older GPs, and that GPs in major cities used physical activity management at twice the rate of rural GPs. No patient characteristics influenced physical activity management. Australian GPs rarely incorporate physical activity management as part of their management of prostate cancer. Strategies are needed to increase the frequency with which GPs recommend physical activity for prostate cancer survivors