A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is increasing interest in the potential role of the natural environment in human health and well-being. However, the evidence-base for specific and direct health or well-being benefits of activity within natural compared to more synthetic environments has not been systematically assessed.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a systematic review to collate and synthesise the findings of studies that compare measurements of health or well-being in natural and synthetic environments. Effect sizes of the differences between environments were calculated and meta-analysis used to synthesise data from studies measuring similar outcomes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Twenty-five studies met the review inclusion criteria. Most of these studies were crossover or controlled trials that investigated the effects of short-term exposure to each environment during a walk or run. This included 'natural' environments, such as public parks and green university campuses, and synthetic environments, such as indoor and outdoor built environments. The most common outcome measures were scores of different self-reported emotions. Based on these data, a meta-analysis provided some evidence of a positive benefit of a walk or run in a natural environment in comparison to a synthetic environment. There was also some support for greater attention after exposure to a natural environment but not after adjusting effect sizes for pretest differences. Meta-analysis of data on blood pressure and cortisol concentrations found less evidence of a consistent difference between environments across studies.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Overall, the studies are suggestive that natural environments may have direct and positive impacts on well-being, but support the need for investment in further research on this question to understand the general significance for public health.</p

COVID-19 trajectories among 57 million adults in England: a cohort study using electronic health records

BACKGROUND: Updatable estimates of COVID-19 onset, progression, and trajectories underpin pandemic mitigation efforts. To identify and characterise disease trajectories, we aimed to define and validate ten COVID-19 phenotypes from nationwide linked electronic health records (EHR) using an extensible framework. METHODS: In this cohort study, we used eight linked National Health Service (NHS) datasets for people in England alive on Jan 23, 2020. Data on COVID-19 testing, vaccination, primary and secondary care records, and death registrations were collected until Nov 30, 2021. We defined ten COVID-19 phenotypes reflecting clinically relevant stages of disease severity and encompassing five categories: positive SARS-CoV-2 test, primary care diagnosis, hospital admission, ventilation modality (four phenotypes), and death (three phenotypes). We constructed patient trajectories illustrating transition frequency and duration between phenotypes. Analyses were stratified by pandemic waves and vaccination status. FINDINGS: Among 57 032 174 individuals included in the cohort, 13 990 423 COVID-19 events were identified in 7 244 925 individuals, equating to an infection rate of 12·7% during the study period. Of 7 244 925 individuals, 460 737 (6·4%) were admitted to hospital and 158 020 (2·2%) died. Of 460 737 individuals who were admitted to hospital, 48 847 (10·6%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), 69 090 (15·0%) received non-invasive ventilation, and 25 928 (5·6%) received invasive ventilation. Among 384 135 patients who were admitted to hospital but did not require ventilation, mortality was higher in wave 1 (23 485 [30·4%] of 77 202 patients) than wave 2 (44 220 [23·1%] of 191 528 patients), but remained unchanged for patients admitted to the ICU. Mortality was highest among patients who received ventilatory support outside of the ICU in wave 1 (2569 [50·7%] of 5063 patients). 15 486 (9·8%) of 158 020 COVID-19-related deaths occurred within 28 days of the first COVID-19 event without a COVID-19 diagnoses on the death certificate. 10 884 (6·9%) of 158 020 deaths were identified exclusively from mortality data with no previous COVID-19 phenotype recorded. We observed longer patient trajectories in wave 2 than wave 1. INTERPRETATION: Our analyses illustrate the wide spectrum of disease trajectories as shown by differences in incidence, survival, and clinical pathways. We have provided a modular analytical framework that can be used to monitor the impact of the pandemic and generate evidence of clinical and policy relevance using multiple EHR sources. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre, led by Health Data Research UK

Patient Outcomes After Applied Behavior Analysis for Autism Spectrum Disorder

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine patterns of service receipt and patient outcomes for children receiving applied behavior analysis (ABA) for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in an integrated health care system in which commercially insured children were covered by a state autism mandate.MethodsThis retrospective, observational study used a random sample of children with ASD (3-17 yrs) who were members of a large integrated health care system in Southern California and referred for ABA between January 2016 and November 2018. From the 4145 children referred, a random stratified sample of 334 was selected to extract data from clinical reports over 24 months of services. The primary outcome measures were time in ABA and child adaptive behavior.ResultsThirteen percent of the sample never received ABA after referral. Of those who were referred for ABA, 66% initiated ABA and remained in services for 12 months, whereas less than half (46%) remained in services for 24 months. Having a history of special education was associated with longer time spent in ABA, whereas having a single parent was associated with discontinuation of ABA. A minority of children received a full ABA dose (28%), but the lowest functioning children still experienced clinically significant adaptive behavior gains after 24 months of ABA (p = 0.02).ConclusionIn a health system implementation of ABA for children with ASD, there were high rates of ABA discontinuation and low ABA dosing. These challenges may diminish the potential benefits of ABA, even in a context in which there is mandated commercial insurance coverage

Habilitative Teletherapy for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Survey of Parents

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate whether service losses during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic were associated with worsened parent mental health or child behavioral health among families of children with autism spectrum disorder and to identify factors associated with favorable parent appraisals of habilitative teletherapy (applied behavior analysis; speech, occupational, physical therapy) for their child.MethodThis web-based survey study was conducted from May to July 2021 with parents whose children were receiving habilitative therapy for autism from an integrated health system. A total of 322 parents responded to the survey (20% response rate). The outcome variables were pandemic-related parent mental health, pandemic-related child behavioral health, and appraisal of habilitative teletherapy. Predictors were COVID-19-related services changes in health care or child care, COVID-19 history (COVID-19 stress, testing positive for COVID-19), and child autism factors (autistic behaviors, caregiving strain).ResultsLoss of regular child care was associated with higher odds of worsened parent mental health (odds ratio [OR] = 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5-4.8); higher levels of caregiving strain were associated with worsened child behavioral health (OR = 2.3, 95% CI = 1.4-3.8). Higher levels of COVID-19 stress were associated with more favorable appraisals of telehealth (β = 0.4, p &lt; 0.01), whereas higher caregiving strain scores were associated with less favorable appraisals of telehealth (β = -0.2, p &lt; 0.01).ConclusionDuring COVID-19, caregiving factors were associated with worsened parent mental health and worsened child behavioral health, and telehealth is not preferred by all families. Policy interventions to support caregivers, such as affordable, high-quality child care and paid family leave, are a high priority