We are all one together : peer educators\u27 views about falls prevention education for community-dwelling older adults - a qualitative study

Background: Falls are common in older people. Despite strong evidence for effective falls prevention strategies, there appears to be limited translation of these strategies from research to clinical practice. Use of peers in delivering falls prevention education messages has been proposed to improve uptake of falls prevention strategies and facilitate translation to practice. Volunteer peer educators often deliver educational presentations on falls prevention to community-dwelling older adults. However, research evaluating the effectiveness of peer-led education approaches in falls prevention has been limited and no known study has evaluated such a program from the perspective of peer educators involved in delivering the message. The purpose of this study was to explore peer educators’ perspective about their role in delivering peer-led falls prevention education for community-dwelling older adults. Methods: A two-stage qualitative inductive constant comparative design was used.In stage one (core component) focus group interviews involving a total of eleven participants were conducted. During stage two (supplementary component) semi-structured interviews with two participants were conducted. Data were analysed thematically by two researchers independently. Key themes were identified and findings were displayed in a conceptual framework. Results: Peer educators were motivated to deliver educational presentations and importantly, to reach an optimal peer connection with their audience. Key themes identified included both personal and organisational factors that impact on educators’ capacity to facilitate their peers’ engagement with the message. Personal factors that facilitated message delivery and engagement included peer-to-peer connection and perceived credibility, while barriers included a reluctance to accept the message that they were at risk of falling by some members in the audience. Organisational factors, including ongoing training for peer educators and formative feedback following presentations, were perceived as essential because they affect successful message delivery. Conclusions: Peer educators have the potential to effectively deliver falls prevention education to older adults and influence acceptance of the message as they possess the peer-to-peer connection that facilitates optimal engagement. There is a need to consider incorporating learnings from this research into a formal large scale evaluation of the effectiveness of the peer education approach in reducing falls in older adults

Improving attendance for cardiovascular risk assessment in Australian general practice: an RCT of a monetary incentive for patients

Extent: 6p.Background: Preventive health care is an important part of general practice however uptake of activities by patients is variable. Monetary incentives for doctors have been used in the UK and Australia to improve rates of screening and immunisation. Few studies have focussed on incentives for patients to attend preventive health care examinations. Our objective was to investigate the use of a monetary incentive to increase patient attendance with their general practitioner for a cardiovascular risk assessment (CVRA). Methods: A pragmatic RCT was conducted in two Australian general practices. Participating GPs underwent academic detailing for cardiovascular risk assessment. 301 patients aged 40–74, who did not have cardiovascular disease, were independently randomised to receive a letter inviting them to a no cost cardiovascular risk assessment with their GP, or the same letter plus an offer of a $25 shopping voucher if they attended. An audit of patient medical records was also undertaken and a patient questionnaire administered to a sub sample of participants. Our main outcome measure was attendance for cardiovascular risk assessment. Results: In the RCT, 56/301(18.6%) patients attended for cardiovascular risk assessment, 29/182 (15.9%) in the control group and 27/119 (22.7%) in the intervention group. The estimated difference of 6.8% (95% CI: -2.5% to 16.0%) was not statistically significant, P = 0.15. The audit showed that GPs may underestimate patients’ absolute cardiovascular risk and the questionnaire that mailed invitations from GPs for a CVRA may encourage patients to attend. Conclusions: A small monetary incentive does not improve attendance for cardiovascular risk assessment. Further research should be undertaken to determine if there are other incentives that may increase attendance for preventive activities in the general practice setting.Nigel Stocks, James Allan, Oliver Frank, Sue Williams and Philip Rya

Canadian oncogenic human papillomavirus cervical infection prevalence: Systematic review and meta-analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infection prevalence is required to determine optimal vaccination strategies. We systematically reviewed the prevalence of oncogenic cervical HPV infection among Canadian females prior to immunization.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We included studies reporting DNA-confirmed oncogenic HPV prevalence estimates among Canadian females identified through searching electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE) and public health websites. Two independent reviewers screened literature results, abstracted data and appraised study quality. Prevalence estimates were meta-analyzed among routine screening populations, HPV-positive, and by cytology/histology results.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Thirty studies plus 21 companion reports were included after screening 837 citations and 120 full-text articles. Many of the studies did not address non-response bias (74%) or use a representative sampling strategy (53%).</p> <p>Age-specific prevalence was highest among females aged < 20 years and slowly declined with increasing age. Across all populations, the highest prevalence estimates from the meta-analyses were observed for HPV types 16 (routine screening populations, 8 studies: 8.6% [95% confidence interval 6.5-10.7%]; HPV-infected, 9 studies: 43.5% [28.7-58.2%]; confirmed cervical cancer, 3 studies: 48.8% [34.0-63.6%]) and 18 (routine screening populations, 8 studies: 3.3% [1.5-5.1%]; HPV-infected, 9 studies: 13.6% [6.1-21.1%], confirmed cervical cancer, 4 studies: 17.1% [6.4-27.9%].</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results support vaccinating females < 20 years of age, along with targeted vaccination of some groups (e.g., under-screened populations). The highest prevalence occurred among HPV types 16 and 18, contributing a combined cervical cancer prevalence of 65.9%. Further cancer protection is expected from cross-protection of non-vaccine HPV types. Poor study quality and heterogeneity suggests that high-quality studies are needed.</p

Enhanced invitation methods to increase uptake of NHS health checks: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: NHS Health Checks is a new program for primary prevention of heart disease, stroke, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and vascular dementia in adults aged 40 to 74 years in England. Individuals without existing cardiovascular disease or diabetes are invited for a Health Check every 5 years. Uptake among those invited is lower than anticipated. Method: The project is a three-arm randomized controlled trial to test the hypothesis that enhanced invitation methods, using the Question-Behaviour Effect (QBE), will increase uptake of NHS Health Checks compared with a standard invitation. Participants comprise individuals eligible for an NHS Health Check registered in two London boroughs. Participants are randomized into one of three arms. Group A receives the standard NHS Health Check invitation letter, information sheet, and reminder letter at 12 weeks for nonattenders. Group B receives a QBE questionnaire 1 week before receiving the standard invitation, information sheet, and reminder letter where appropriate. Group C is the same as Group B, but participants are offered a £5 retail voucher if they return the questionnaire. Participants are randomized in equal proportions, stratified by general practice. The primary outcome is uptake of NHS Health Checks 6 months after invitation from electronic health records. We will estimate the incremental health service cost per additional completed Health Check for trial groups B and C versus trial arm A, as well as evaluating the impact of the QBE questionnaire, and questionnaire plus voucher, on the socioeconomic inequality in uptake of Health Checks. The trial includes a nested comparison of two methods for implementing allocation, one implemented manually at general practices and the other implemented automatically through the information systems used to generate invitations for the Health Check. Discussion: The research will provide evidence on whether asking individuals to complete a preliminary questionnaire, by using the QBE, is effective in increasing uptake of Health Checks and whether an incentive alters questionnaire return rates as well as uptake of Health Checks. The trial interventions can be readily translated into routine service delivery if they are shown to be cost-effective