CHOICES: A Family-based Childhood Obesity Intervention for Low Income Minority Children

The objective of this presentation is to discuss the effectiveness of a 6-week summer childhood obesity intervention for low-income minority children ages 10-12. Topics will include strategies and best practices for effective summer programming for youth. The target audience includes practitioners, educators, and researchers interested in childhood obesity interventions involving families and communities

‘Never waste a crisis’: a commentary on the COVID‐19 pandemic as a driver for innovation in maternity care

Abstract unavailable

‘Never waste a crisis’: a commentary on the COVID‐19 pandemic as a driver for innovation in maternity care

Abstract unavailable

The United Kingdom and the Netherlands maternity care responses to COVID-19: A comparative study

BackgroundThe national health care response to coronavirus (COVID-19) has varied between countries. The United Kingdom (UK) and the Netherlands (NL) have comparable maternity and neonatal care systems, and experienced similar numbers of COVID-19 infections, but had different organisational responses to the pandemic. Understanding why and how similarities and differences occurred in these two contexts could inform optimal care in normal circumstances, and during future crises.AimTo compare the UK and Dutch COVID-19 maternity and neonatal care responses in three key domains: choice of birthplace, companionship, and families in vulnerable situations.MethodA multi-method study, including documentary analysis of national organisation policy and guidance on COVID-19, and interviews with national and regional stakeholders.FindingsBoth countries had an infection control focus, with less emphasis on the impact of restrictions, especially for families in vulnerable situations. Differences included care providers’ fear of contracting COVID-19; the extent to which community- and personalised care was embedded in the care system before the pandemic; and how far multidisciplinary collaboration and service-user involvement were prioritised.ConclusionWe recommend that countries should 1) make a systematic plan for crisis decision-making before a serious event occurs, and that this must include authentic service-user involvement, multidisciplinary collaboration, and protection of staff wellbeing 2) integrate women’s and families’ values into the maternity and neonatal care system, ensuring equitable inclusion of the most vulnerable and 3) strengthen community provision to ensure system wide resilience to future shocks from pandemics, or other unexpected large-scale events

Transplant of organs from donors with positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing: A report from the organ procurement and transplantation network ad hoc disease transmission advisory committee.

BACKGROUND: Decisions to transplant organs from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid test-positive (NAT+) donors must balance risk of donor-derived transmission events (DDTE) with the scarcity of available organs. METHODS: Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) data were used to compare organ utilization and recipient outcomes between SARS-CoV-2 NAT+ and NAT- donors. NAT+ was defined by either a positive upper or lower respiratory tract (LRT) sample within 21 days of procurement. Potential DDTE were adjudicated by OPTN Disease Transmission Advisory Committee. RESULTS: From May 27, 2021 (date of OTPN policy for required LRT testing of lung donors) to January 31, 2022, organs were recovered from 617 NAT+ donors from all OPTN regions and 53 of 57 (93%) organ procurement organizations. NAT+ donors were younger and had higher organ quality scores for kidney and liver. Organ utilization was lower for NAT+ donors compared to NAT- donors. A total of 1241 organs (776 kidneys, 316 livers, 106 hearts, 22 lungs, and 21 other) were transplanted from 514 NAT+ donors compared to 21 946 organs from 8853 NAT- donors. Medical urgency was lower for recipients of NAT+ liver and heart transplants. The median waitlist time was longer for liver recipients of NAT+ donors. The match run sequence number for final acceptor was higher for NAT+ donors for all organ types. Outcomes for hospital length of stay, 30-day mortality, and 30-day graft loss were similar for all organ types. No SARS-CoV-2 DDTE occurred in this interval. CONCLUSIONS: Transplantation of SARS-CoV-2 NAT+ donor organs appears safe for short-term outcomes of death and graft loss and ameliorates the organ shortage. Further study is required to assure comparable longer term outcomes

Making maternity and neonatal care personalised in the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the Babies Born Better survey in the UK and the Netherlands

Background The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on women’s birth experiences. To date, there are no studies that use both quantitative and qualitative data to compare women’s birth experiences before and during the pandemic, across more than one country. Aim To examine women’s birth experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic and to compare the experiences of women who gave birth in the United Kingdom (UK) or the Netherlands (NL) either before or during the pandemic. Method This study is based on analyses of quantitative and qualitative data from the online Babies Born Better survey. Responses recorded by women giving birth in the UK and the NL between June and December 2020 have been used, encompassing women who gave birth between 2017 and 2020. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and chi-squared tests were performed to compare women who gave birth pre- versus during pandemic and separately by country. Qualitative data was analysed by inductive thematic analysis. Findings Respondents in both the UK and the NL who gave birth during the pandemic were as likely, or, if they had a self-reported above average standard of life, more likely to rate their labour and birth experience positively when compared to women who gave birth pre-pandemic. This was despite the fact that those labouring in the pandemic reported a lack of support and limits placed on freedom of choice. Two potential explanatory themes were identified in the qualitative data: respondents had lower expectations of care during the pandemic, and they appreciated the efforts of staff to give individualised care, despite the rules. Conclusion Our study implies that many women labouring during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced restrictions, but their experience was mitigated by staff actions. However, personalised care should not be maintained by the good will of care providers, but should be a priority in maternity care policy to benefit all service users equitably