76 research outputs found

    Understanding the rise of cardiometabolic diseases in low- and middle-income countries

    Get PDF
    Increases in the prevalence of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), particularly cardiometabolic diseases such as cardiovascular disease, stroke and diabetes, and their major risk factors have not been uniform across settings: for example, cardiovascular disease mortality has declined over recent decades in high-income countries but increased in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The factors contributing to this rise are varied and are influenced by environmental, social, political and commercial determinants of health, among other factors. This Review focuses on understanding the rise of cardiometabolic diseases in LMICs, with particular emphasis on obesity and its drivers, together with broader environmental and macro determinants of health, as well as LMIC-based responses to counteract cardiometabolic diseases

    Cognitive impairment and hypertension in older adults living in extreme poverty: a cross-sectional study in Peru.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that hypertension is a risk factor for cognitive impairment, but whether this association is also present in extremely poor populations in Low Middle Income Countries settings remains to be studied. Understanding other drivers of cognitive impairment in this unique population also merits attention. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis using data from the "Encuesta de Salud y Bienestar del Adulto Mayor", a regional survey conducted in an extremely poor population of people older than 65 years old from 12 Peruvian cities in 2012. The outcome variable was cognitive impairment, determined by a score of ≤7 in the modified Mini-Mental State Examination. The exposure was self-reported hypertension status. Variables such as age, gender, controlled hypertension, education level, occupation, depression and area of living (rural/urban) were included in the adjusted analysis. We used Poisson regression with robust variance to calculate prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: Data from 3842 participants was analyzed, 51.8% were older than 70 years, and 45.6% were females. The prevalence of cognitive impairment was 1.7% (95% CI 1.3%-2.1%). There was no significant difference on the prevalence of cognitive impairment between the group of individuals with hypertension in comparison with those without hypertension (PR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.33-1.23). CONCLUSIONS: The association described between hypertension and cognitive impairment was not found in a sample of extremely poor Peruvian older adults

    Design of financial incentive interventions to improve lifestyle behaviors and health outcomes: A systematic review [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]

    Get PDF
    Background: Financial incentives may improve the initiation and engagement of behaviour change that reduce the negative outcomes associated with non-communicable diseases. There is still a paucity in guidelines or recommendations that help define key aspects of incentive-oriented interventions, including the type of incentive (e.g. cash rewards, vouchers), the frequency and magnitude of the incentive, and its mode of delivery. We aimed to systematically review the literature on financial incentives that promote healthy lifestyle behaviours or improve health profiles, and focused on the methodological approach to define the incentive intervention and its delivery. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO on 26 July 2018 (CRD42018102556). Methods: We sought studies in which a financial incentive was delivered to improve a health-related lifestyle behaviour (e.g., physical activity) or a health profile (e.g., HbA1c in people with diabetes). The search (which took place on March 3rd 2018) was conducted using OVID (MEDLINE and Embase), CINAHL and Scopus. Results: The search yielded 7,575 results and 37 were included for synthesis. Of the total, 83.8% (31/37) of the studies were conducted in the US, and 40.5% (15/37) were randomised controlled trials. Only one study reported the background and rationale followed to develop the incentive and conducted a focus group to understand what sort of incentives would be acceptable for their study population. There was a degree of consistency across the studies in terms of the direction, form, certainty, and recipient of the financial incentives used, but the magnitude and immediacy of the incentives were heterogeneous. Conclusions: The available literature on financial incentives to improve health-related lifestyles rarely reports on the rationale or background that defines the incentive approach, the magnitude of the incentive and other relevant details of the intervention, and the reporting of this information is essential to foster its use as potential effective interventions

    Design of financial incentive interventions to improve lifestyle behaviors and health outcomes: A systematic review [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]

    Get PDF
    Background: Financial incentives may improve the initiation and engagement of behaviour change that reduce the negative outcomes associated with non-communicable diseases. There is still a paucity in guidelines or recommendations that help define key aspects of incentive-oriented interventions, including the type of incentive (e.g. cash rewards, vouchers), the frequency and magnitude of the incentive, and its mode of delivery. We aimed to systematically review the literature on financial incentives that promote healthy lifestyle behaviours or improve health profiles, and focused on the methodological approach to define the incentive intervention and its delivery. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO on 26 July 2018 (CRD42018102556). Methods: We sought studies in which a financial incentive was delivered to improve a health-related lifestyle behaviour (e.g., physical activity) or a health profile (e.g., HbA1c in people with diabetes). The search (which took place on March 3rd 2018) was conducted using OVID (MEDLINE and Embase), CINAHL and Scopus. Results: The search yielded 7,575 results and 37 were included for synthesis. Of the total, 83.8% (31/37) of the studies were conducted in the US, and 40.5% (15/37) were randomised controlled trials. Only one study reported the background and rationale followed to develop the incentive and conducted a focus group to understand what sort of incentives would be acceptable for their study population. There was a degree of consistency across the studies in terms of the direction, form, certainty, and recipient of the financial incentives used, but the magnitude and immediacy of the incentives were heterogeneous. Conclusions: The available literature on financial incentives to improve health-related lifestyles rarely reports on the rationale or background that defines the incentive approach, the magnitude of the incentive and other relevant details of the intervention, and the reporting of this information is essential to foster its use as potential effective interventions

    The effect of individual and mixed rewards on diabetes management: A feasibility randomized controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Incentives play a role in introducing health-related benefits, but no interventions using mixed incentives, i.e. a combination of individual and group incentives, have been tested in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We evaluated the feasibility of implementing individual- and mixed-incentives, with and without a supportive partner, on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) control and weight loss among patients with T2DM. Methods: This is a feasibility, sex-stratified, single-blinded, randomized controlled study in individuals with T2DM. All participants received diabetes education and tailored goal setting for weight and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Participants were randomly assigned into three arms: individual incentives (Arm 1), mixed incentives-altruism (Arm 2), and mixed incentives-cooperation (Arm 3). Participants were accompanied by a diabetes educator every other week to monitor targets, and the intervention period lasted 3 months. The primary outcome was the change in HbA1c at 3 months from baseline. Weight and change body mass index (BMI) were considered as secondary outcomes. Results: Out of 783 patients screened, a total of 54 participants, 18 per study arm, were enrolled and 44 (82%) completed the 3-month follow-up. Mean baseline HbA1c values were 8.5%, 7.9% and 8.2% in Arm 1, Arm 2, and Arm 3, respectively. At 3 months, participants in all three study arms showed reductions in HbA1c ranging from -0.9% in Arm 2 to -1.4% in Arm 1. Weight and BMI also showed reductions. Conclusions: Individual and mixed cash incentives show important reductions in HbA1c, weight and BMI in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after 3 months.  Recruitment and uptake of the intervention were successfully accomplished demonstrating feasibility to conduct larger effectiveness studies to test individual and mixed economic incentives for diabetes management. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02891382</ns4:p

    The effect of individual and mixed rewards on diabetes management: A feasibility randomized controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Incentives play a role in introducing health-related benefits, but no interventions using mixed incentives, i.e. a combination of individual and group incentives, have been tested in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We evaluated the feasibility of implementing individual- and mixed-incentives, with and without a supportive partner, on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) control and weight loss among patients with T2DM. Methods: This is a feasibility, sex-stratified, single-blinded, randomized controlled study in individuals with T2DM. All participants received diabetes education and tailored goal setting for weight and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Participants were randomly assigned into three arms: individual incentives (Arm 1), mixed incentives-altruism (Arm 2), and mixed incentives-cooperation (Arm 3). Participants were accompanied by a diabetes educator every other week to monitor targets, and the intervention period lasted 3 months. The primary outcome was the change in HbA1c at 3 months from baseline. Weight and change body mass index (BMI) were considered as secondary outcomes. Results: Out of 783 patients screened, a total of 54 participants, 18 per study arm, were enrolled and 44 (82%) completed the 3-month follow-up. Mean baseline HbA1c values were 8.5%, 7.9% and 8.2% in Arm 1, Arm 2, and Arm 3, respectively. At 3 months, participants in all three study arms showed reductions in HbA1c ranging from -0.9% in Arm 2 to -1.4% in Arm 1. Weight and BMI also showed reductions. Conclusions: Individual and mixed cash incentives show important reductions in HbA1c, weight and BMI in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after 3 months.  Recruitment and uptake of the intervention were successfully accomplished demonstrating feasibility to conduct larger effectiveness studies to test individual and mixed economic incentives for diabetes management. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02891382</ns4:p

    The effect of individual and mixed rewards on diabetes management: A feasibility randomized controlled trial.

    Get PDF
    Background: Incentives play a role in introducing health-related benefits, but no interventions using mixed incentives, i.e. a combination of individual and group incentives, have been tested in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We evaluated the feasibility of implementing individual- and mixed-incentives, with and without a supportive partner, on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) control and weight loss among patients with T2DM. Methods: This is a feasibility, sex-stratified, single-blinded, randomized controlled study in individuals with T2DM. All participants received diabetes education and tailored goal setting for weight and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Participants were randomly assigned into three arms: individual incentives (Arm 1), mixed incentives-altruism (Arm 2), and mixed incentives-cooperation (Arm 3). Participants were accompanied by a diabetes educator every other week to monitor targets, and the intervention period lasted 3 months. The primary outcome was the change in HbA1c at 3 months from baseline. Weight and change body mass index (BMI) were considered as secondary outcomes. Results: Out of 783 patients screened, a total of 54 participants, 18 per study arm, were enrolled and 44 (82%) completed the 3-month follow-up. Mean baseline HbA1c values were 8.5%, 7.9% and 8.2% in Arm 1, Arm 2, and Arm 3, respectively. At 3 months, participants in all three study arms showed reductions in HbA1c ranging from -0.9% in Arm 2 to -1.4% in Arm 1. Weight and BMI also showed reductions. Conclusions: Individual and mixed cash incentives show important reductions in HbA1c, weight and BMI in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after 3 months.  Recruitment and uptake of the intervention were successfully accomplished demonstrating feasibility to conduct larger effectiveness studies to test individual and mixed economic incentives for diabetes management. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02891382

    Lessons learned about co-creation: developing a complex intervention in rural Peru.

    Get PDF
    Background: Co-creation is the process of involving stakeholders in the development of interventions. Although co-creation is becoming more widespread, reports of the process and lessons learned are scarce.Objective: To describe the process and lessons learned from using the COHESION manual, a co-creation methodology to develop interventions aimed at the improvement of diagnosis and/or management of chronic diseases at the primary healthcare level in a low-resource setting in Peru.Methods: Observational study to describe the use of the COHESION manual 'Moving from Research to Interventions: The COHESION Model' developed for a multi-country project in low- and middle-income countries for co-creation and the adaptations needed to customize it to the local context of rural communities in northern Peru.Results: The actual process of co-creation in Peru included co-creation-related questions in the formative research; an initial consultation with stakeholders at the micro, meso, and macro levels (e.g. community members, health workers, and policy-makers); the analysis of the collected data; a second consultation with each stakeholder group; the prioritization of intervention options; and finally the design of a theory of change for all activities included in the complex intervention. The complex intervention included: 1) offer training in specific diseases and soft skills to health workers, 2) create radio programs that promote chronic disease prevention and management plus empower patients to ask questions during their visits to primary health care (PHC) facilities, and 3) provide a small grant to the PHC for infrastructure improvement. Small adaptations to the COHESION manual were necessary for this co-creation process.Conclusion: This study provides a practical example of the process of co-creating complex interventions to increase access and quality of health care in a low-resource setting. The process, components, challenges and opportunities identified could be useful for other researchers who want to co-create interventions with beneficiaries in similar settings

    Design of financial incentive interventions to improve lifestyle behaviors and health outcomes: A systematic review

    Get PDF
    Background: Financial incentives may improve the initiation and engagement of behaviour change that reduce the negative outcomes associated with non-communicable diseases. There is still a paucity in guidelines or recommendations that help define key aspects of incentive-oriented interventions, including the type of incentive (e.g. cash rewards, vouchers), the frequency and magnitude of the incentive, and its mode of delivery.  We aimed to systematically review the literature on financial incentives that promote healthy lifestyle behaviours or improve health profiles, and focused on the methodological approach to define the incentive intervention and its delivery. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO on 26 July 2018 ( CRD42018102556). Methods: We sought studies in which a financial incentive was delivered to improve a health-related lifestyle behaviour (e.g., physical activity) or a health profile (e.g., HbA1c in people with diabetes). The search (which took place on March 3 rd 2018) was conducted using OVID (MEDLINE and Embase), CINAHL and Scopus. Results: The search yielded 7,575 results and 37 were included for synthesis. Of the total, 83.8% (31/37) of the studies were conducted in the US, and 40.5% (15/37) were randomised controlled trials. Only one study reported the background and rationale followed to develop the incentive and conducted a focus group to understand what sort of incentives would be acceptable for their study population. There was a degree of consistency across the studies in terms of the direction, form, certainty, and recipient of the financial incentives used, but the magnitude and immediacy of the incentives were heterogeneous. Conclusions: The available literature on financial incentives to improve health-related lifestyles rarely reports on the rationale or background that defines the incentive approach, the magnitude of the incentive and other relevant details of the intervention, and the reporting of this information is essential to foster its use as potential effective interventions
    • …
    corecore