Long-term biological and behavioural impact of an adolescent sexual health intervention in Tanzania: follow-up survey of the community-based MEMA kwa Vijana Trial.

BACKGROUND: The ability of specific behaviour-change interventions to reduce HIV infection in young people remains questionable. Since January 1999, an adolescent sexual and reproductive health (SRH) intervention has been implemented in ten randomly chosen intervention communities in rural Tanzania, within a community randomised trial (see below; NCT00248469). The intervention consisted of teacher-led, peer-assisted in-school education, youth-friendly health services, community activities, and youth condom promotion and distribution. Process evaluation in 1999-2002 showed high intervention quality and coverage. A 2001/2 intervention impact evaluation showed no impact on the primary outcomes of HIV seroincidence and herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) seroprevalence but found substantial improvements in SRH knowledge, reported attitudes, and some reported sexual behaviours. It was postulated that the impact on "upstream" knowledge, attitude, and reported behaviour outcomes seen at the 3-year follow-up would, in the longer term, lead to a reduction in HIV and HSV-2 infection rates and other biological outcomes. A further impact evaluation survey in 2007/8 ( approximately 9 years post-intervention) tested this hypothesis. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This is a cross-sectional survey (June 2007 through July 2008) of 13,814 young people aged 15-30 y who had attended trial schools during the first phase of the MEMA kwa Vijana intervention trial (1999-2002). Prevalences of the primary outcomes HIV and HSV-2 were 1.8% and 25.9% in males and 4.0% and 41.4% in females, respectively. The intervention did not significantly reduce risk of HIV (males adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 0.91, 95%CI 0.50-1.65; females aPR 1.07, 95%CI 0.68-1.67) or HSV-2 (males aPR 0.94, 95%CI 0.77-1.15; females aPR 0.96, 95%CI 0.87-1.06). The intervention was associated with a reduction in the proportion of males reporting more than four sexual partners in their lifetime (aPR 0.87, 95%CI 0.78-0.97) and an increase in reported condom use at last sex with a non-regular partner among females (aPR 1.34, 95%CI 1.07-1.69). There was a clear and consistent beneficial impact on knowledge, but no significant impact on reported attitudes to sexual risk, reported pregnancies, or other reported sexual behaviours. The study population was likely to have been, on average, at lower risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections compared to other rural populations, as only youth who had reached year five of primary school were eligible. CONCLUSIONS: SRH knowledge can be improved and retained long-term, but this intervention had only a limited effect on reported behaviour and no significant effect on HIV/STI prevalence. Youth interventions integrated within intensive, community-wide risk reduction programmes may be more successful and should be evaluated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT0024846

Parents' views on care of their very premature babies in neonatal intensive care units: a qualitative study

Background The admission of a very premature infant to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) is often a difficult time for parents. This paper explores parents’ views and experiences of the care for their very premature baby on NICU. Methods Parents were eligible if they had a baby born before 32 weeks gestation and cared for in a NICU, and spoke English well. 32 mothers and 7 fathers were interviewed to explore their experiences of preterm birth. Although parents’ evaluation of care in the NICU was not the aim of these interviews, all parents spoke spontaneously and at length on this topic. Results were analysed using thematic analysis. Results Overall, parents were satisfied with the care on the neonatal unit. Three major themes determining satisfaction with neonatal care emerged: 1) parents’ involvement; including looking after their own baby, the challenges of expressing breast milk, and easy access to their baby; 2) staff competence and efficiency; including communication, experience and confidence, information and explanation; and 3) interpersonal relationships with staff; including sensitive and emotional support, reassurance and encouragement, feeling like an individual. Conclusions Determinants of positive experiences of care were generally consistent with previous research. Specifically, provision of information, support for parents and increasing their involvement in the care of their baby were highlighted by parents as important in their experience of care

Evidence‐informed practice versus evidence‐based practice educational interventions for improving knowledge, attitudes, understanding, and behavior toward the application of evidence into practice:A comprehensive systematic review of undergraduate students

Over the past three decades, there has been increasing attention on improving healthcare quality, reliability, and ultimately, patient outcomes, through the provision of healthcare that that is influenced by the best available evidence, and devoid of rituals and tradition (Andre, Aune, & Brænd, 2016; Melnyk, Gallagher‐Ford, Long, & Fineout‐Overholt, 2014; Sackett, Rosenberg, Gray, Haynes, & Richardson, 1996). There is an expectation by professional regulators such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council, United Kingdom (NMC, 2015) and the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC, 2012) that the professional, as part of their accountability applies the best available evidence to inform their clinical decision‐making, roles and responsibilities. This is imperative for several reasons. Firstly, it enhances the delivery of healthcare and improves efficiency. Secondly, it produces better intervention outcomes and promotes transparency. Thirdly, it enhances co‐operation and knowledge sharing among professionals and service users, and ultimately, it improves patient outcomes and enhances job satisfaction. Indeed, the need to guide healthcare practice with evidence has been emphasized by several authors, including Kelly, Heath, Howick, & Greenhalgh, 2015; Nevo & Slonim‐Nevo, 2011; Scott & McSherry, 2009; Shlonsky & Stern, 2007; Smith & Rennie, 2014; Straus, Glasziou, Richardson, & Haynes, 2011; Tickle‐Degnen & Bedell, 2003; and Sackett et al., 1996. According to these authors, the effective and consistent application of evidence into healthcare practice helps practitioners to deliver the best care for their patients and patient relatives. Nevertheless, there is often an ineffective and inconsistent application of evidence into healthcare practice (McSherry, 2007; Melnyk, 2017; Nevo & Slonim‐Nevo, 2011)

Protocol for a systematic review of the effects of schools and school-environment interventions on health: evidence mapping and syntheses

Background: Schools may have important effects on students' and staff's health. Rather than treating schools merely as sites for health education, 'school-environment' interventions treat schools as settings which influence health. Evidence concerning the effects of such interventions has not been recently synthesised. Methods/design: Systematic review aiming to map and synthesise evidence on what theories and conceptual frameworks are most commonly used to inform school-environment interventions or explain school-level influences on health; what effects school-environment interventions have on health/health inequalities; how feasible and acceptable are school-environment interventions; what effects other school-level factors have on health; and through what processes school-level influences affect health. We will examine interventions aiming to promote health by modifying schools' physical, social or cultural environment via actions focused on school policies and practices relating to education, pastoral care and other aspects of schools beyond merely providing health education. Participants are staff and students age 4-18 years. We will review published research unrestricted by language, year or source. Searching will involve electronic databases including Embase, ERIC, PubMed, PsycInfo and Social Science Citation Index using natural-language phrases plus reference/citation checking. Stage 1 will map studies descriptively by focus and methods. Stage 2 will involve additional inclusion criteria, quality assessment and data extraction undertaken by two reviewers in parallel. Evidence will be synthesised narratively and statistically where appropriate (undertaking subgroup analyses and meta-regression and where no significant heterogeneity of effect sizes is found, pooling these to calculate a final effect size). Discussion: We anticipate: finding a large number of studies missed by previous reviews; that non-intervention studies of school effects examine a greater breadth of determinants than are addressed by intervention studies; and that intervention effect estimates are greater than for school-based health curriculum interventions without school-environment components

Missing and accounted for: gaps and areas of wealth in the public health review literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>High-quality review evidence is useful for informing and influencing public health policy and practice decisions. However, certain topic areas lack representation in terms of the quantity and quality of review literature available. The objectives of this paper are to identify the quantity, as well as quality, of review-level evidence available on the effectiveness of public health interventions for public health decision makers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Searches conducted on <url>http://www.health-evidence.ca</url> produced an inventory of public health review literature in 21 topic areas. Gaps and areas of wealth in the review literature, as well as the proportion of reviews rated methodologically strong, moderate, or weak were identified. The top 10 topic areas of interest for registered users and visitors of <url>http://www.health-evidence.ca</url> were extracted from user profile data and Google Analytics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Registered users' top three interests included: 1) healthy communities, 2) chronic diseases, and 3) nutrition. The top three preferences for visitors included: 1) chronic diseases, 2) physical activity, and 3) addiction/substance use. All of the topic areas with many (301+) available reviews were of interest to registered users and/or visitors (mental health, physical activity, addiction/substance use, adolescent health, child health, nutrition, adult health, and chronic diseases). Conversely, the majority of registered users and/or visitors did not have preference for topic areas with few (≤ 150) available reviews (food safety and inspection, dental health, environmental health) with the exception of social determinants of health and healthy communities. Across registered users' and visitors' topic areas of preference, 80.2% of the reviews were of well-done methodological quality, with 43.5% of reviews having a strong quality rating and 36.7% a moderate review quality rating.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In topic areas in which many reviews are available, higher level syntheses are needed to guide policy and practice. For other topic areas with few reviews, it is necessary to determine whether primary study evidence exists, or is needed, so that reviews can be conducted in the future. Considering that less than half of the reviews available on <url>http://www.health-evidence.ca</url> are of strong methodological quality, the quality of the review-level evidence needs to improve across the range of public health topic areas.</p

Shortcuts in knowledge mobilization : an ethnographic study of advanced nurse practitioner discharge decision‐making in the emergency department

Aim To understand how advanced nurse practitioners use knowledge to inform their discharge decision‐making in the emergency department. Background Advanced nurse practitioner roles have developed globally in a wide range of healthcare settings, including the emergency department, over the past few years. The scope of practice and training vary widely between countries. Little is known about how they use clinical knowledge in the emergency department. Design An ethnographic study was undertaken in an emergency department in the North of England. Method Data were collected by observation (n = 5) and semi‐structured interviews (n = 13) between September 2016 and June 2017. Interview transcripts and field notes were coded using Quirkos software. Thematic analysis was used to identify key themes. Findings In boundary blurring with medicine, advanced nurse practitioners in the emergency department need to make timely, autonomous discharge decisions. Knowledge mobilization is messy and complex; however, shortcuts facilitate autonomous discharge decision‐making. More experienced advanced nurse practitioners rely less on shortcuts as they draw on experiential knowledge. Discussion Boundary blurring in the advanced nurse practitioner role in the emergency department, requires reliable knowledge shortcuts. Support from senior colleagues and accessible smartphone apps enable advanced nurse practitioners to efficiently make discharge decisions. This study adds to previous research on how knowledge is managed in boundary blurring. Conclusion Advanced nurse practitioners in the emergency department require timely access to relevant, up to date knowledge. This study has highlighted their preferred knowledge sources to inform discharge decision‐making. In boundary blurring, shortcuts enable ANPs to use knowledge efficiently to inform patient care in the emergency department. Impact The findings increase our understanding of how to equip advanced nurse practitioners with knowledge to facilitate clinical decision‐making. Clinical managers should provide mentorship and relevant up to date knowledge shortcuts to ensure efficient, evidence‐based discharge decision‐making