Defining medical deserts-an international consensus-building exercise

Publisher Copyright: © 2023 Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.Background: Medical deserts represent a pressing public health and health systems challenge. The COVID-19 pandemic further exacerbated the gap between people and health services, yet a commonly agreed definition of medical deserts was lacking. This study aims to define medical deserts through a consensus-building exercise, explaining the phenomenon to its full extent, in a manner that can apply to countries and health systems across the globe. Methods: We used a standard Delphi exercise for the consensus-building process. The first phase consisted of one round of individual online meetings with selected key informants; the second phase comprised two rounds of surveys when a consensus was reached in January 2023. The first phase-the in-depth individual meetings-was organized online. The dimensions to include in the definition of medical deserts were identified, ranked and selected based on their recurrence and importance. The second phase-the surveys-was organized online. Finally, external validation was obtained from stakeholders via email. Results: The agreed definition highlight five major dimensions: 'Medical deserts are areas where population healthcare needs are unmet partially or totally due to lack of adequate access or improper quality of healthcare services caused by (i) insufficient human resources in health or (ii) facilities, (iii) long waiting times, (iv) disproportionate high costs of services or (v) other socio-cultural barriers'. Conclusions: The five dimensions of access to healthcare: (i) insufficient human resources in health or (ii) facilities, (iii) long waiting times, (iv) disproportionate high costs of services and (v) other socio-cultural barriers-ought to be addressed to mitigate medical deserts. The Author(s) 2023.publishersversionpublishe

Enhancing Patient Communication Through Health Professionals’ Digital Literacy

Digital health literacy has been defined as the ‘ability to seek, find, understand, and appraise health information from electronic sources and apply the knowledge gained to address or solve a health prob­lem’ (Norman and Skinner, 2006). Health literacy and digital health literacy are essential in order to reach universal health coverage and to reform the processes of the healthcare systems (WHO, 2018). Healthcare professionals need to treat patients in a continuous evolving structure (WHO, 2013). The re­search question that guided the paper is ‘How can Romanian health professionals’ digital health liter­acy be used to improve communication with their patients?’. The aim of the study is to explore Roma­nian health professionals’ level of digital literacy, to identify how it can improve the communication with the patients. 20 interviews with resident and senior medical doctors, medical students and nurses were conducted. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and then stored as Word documents in a password-secured environment. From the data gath­ered in the interviews four major themes emerged: (a) digital health literacy; (b) communication with the patients; (c) improvements for the National Health Strategy 2014-2020; (d) time as a barrier in commu­nication. Data was analyzed using thematic analysis through the MAXQDA2018 software.</p

An assessment of the occupational and environmental health needs in seven Southeastern European and West-Central Asian countries

Eastern European and Central Asian countries are undergoing rapid socioeconomic and political reforms. Many old industrial facilities are either abandoned, or use outdated technologies that severely impact the environment. Emerging industries have less regulation than in developed countries and environmental and occupational problems seem to be increasing. Under a US National Institutes of Health pilot grant, we developed an interdisciplinary One Health research network in Southeastern Europe and West-Central Asia to identify environmental and occupational problems. From 2012 to 2014, this GeoHealth Hub engaged 11 academic centers and 16 public health institutions in eight different countries: Albania, Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Romania, and the United States with a goal of strengthening environmental and occupational research and training capacities. Employing face-to-face interviews and large group meetings, we conducted an evidenced-based needs and opportunities assessment focused on aquatic health, food safety, and zoonotic diseases. Comprehensive reviews of the published literature yielded priority research areas for each of the seven GeoHealth Hub countries including heavy metal and pesticide contamination, tick-borne diseases, rabies, brucellosis, and inadequate public health surveillance

Genomic reconstruction of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in England

AbstractThe evolution of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus leads to new variants that warrant timely epidemiological characterization. Here we use the dense genomic surveillance data generated by the COVID-19 Genomics UK Consortium to reconstruct the dynamics of 71 different lineages in each of 315 English local authorities between September 2020 and June 2021. This analysis reveals a series of subepidemics that peaked in early autumn 2020, followed by a jump in transmissibility of the B.1.1.7/Alpha lineage. The Alpha variant grew when other lineages declined during the second national lockdown and regionally tiered restrictions between November and December 2020. A third more stringent national lockdown suppressed the Alpha variant and eliminated nearly all other lineages in early 2021. Yet a series of variants (most of which contained the spike E484K mutation) defied these trends and persisted at moderately increasing proportions. However, by accounting for sustained introductions, we found that the transmissibility of these variants is unlikely to have exceeded the transmissibility of the Alpha variant. Finally, B.1.617.2/Delta was repeatedly introduced in England and grew rapidly in early summer 2021, constituting approximately 98% of sampled SARS-CoV-2 genomes on 26 June 2021.</jats:p

Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries

Background Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks. Methods The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned. Results A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P &lt; 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31). Conclusion Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)