Public health research (Southampton, England)最新文献

{"title":"Evaluation of the Healthy Start voucher scheme on maternal vitamin use and child breastfeeding: a natural experiment using data linkage.","authors":"Ruth Dundas, Massoud Boroujerdi, Susan Browne, Manuela Deidda, Paul Bradshaw, Peter Craig, Emma McIntosh, Alison Parkes, Daniel Wight, Charlotte Wright, Alastair H Leyland","doi":"10.3310/RTEU2107","DOIUrl":"10.3310/RTEU2107","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Having a good start in life during pregnancy and infancy has been shown to be important for living both a healthy life and a longer life. Despite the introduction of many policies for the early-years age group, including voucher schemes, with the aim of improving nutrition, there is limited evidence of their impact on health.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the effectiveness of the Healthy Start voucher scheme on infant, child and maternal outcomes, and to capture the lived experiences of the Healthy Start voucher scheme for low-income women.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This was a natural experiment study using existing data sets, linked to routinely collected health data sets, with a nested qualitative study of low-income women and an assessment of the health economics.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Representative sample of Scottish children and UK children.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Growing Up in Scotland cohort 2 (<i>n</i> = 2240), respondents to the 2015 Infant Feeding Study (<i>n</i> = 8067) and a sample of 40 participants in the qualitative study.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>The Health Start voucher, a means-tested scheme that provides vouchers worth £3.10 per week to spend on liquid milk, formula milk, fruit and vegetables.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Infant and child outcomes - breastfeeding initiation and duration; maternal outcomes - vitamin use pre and during pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The exposed group were women receiving the Healthy Start voucher (R), with two control groups: eligible and not claiming the Healthy Start voucher (E) and nearly eligible. There was no difference in vitamin use during pregnancy for either comparison (receiving the Healthy Start voucher, 82%; eligible and not claiming the Healthy Start voucher, 86%; <i>p</i> = 0.10 vs. receiving the Healthy Start voucher, 87%; nearly eligible, 88%; <i>p</i> = 0.43) in the Growing Up in Scotland cohort. Proportions were similar for the Infant Feeding Study cohort (receiving the Healthy Start voucher, 89%; eligible and not claiming the Healthy Start voucher, 86%; <i>p</i> = 0.01 vs. receiving the Healthy Start voucher, 89%; nearly eligible, 87%; <i>p</i> = 0.01); although results were statistically significantly different, these were small effect sizes. There was no difference for either comparison in breastfeeding initiation or breastfeeding duration in months in Growing Up in Scotland, but there was a negative effect of the Healthy Start voucher in the Infant Feeding Survey. This contrast between data sets indicates that results are inconclusive for breastfeeding. The qualitative study found that despite the low monetary value the women valued the Healthy Start voucher scheme. However, the broader lives of low-income women are crucial to understand the constraints to offer a healthy diet.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Owing to the policy being in place, it was di","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 11","pages":"1-101"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89720966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Investigating health and social outcomes of the Big Local community empowerment initiative in England: a mixed method evaluation.","authors":"Jennie Popay,&nbsp;Emma Halliday,&nbsp;Rebecca Mead,&nbsp;Anne Townsend,&nbsp;Nasima Akhter,&nbsp;Clare Bambra,&nbsp;Ben Barr,&nbsp;Rachel Anderson de Cuevas,&nbsp;Konstantinos Daras,&nbsp;Matt Egan,&nbsp;Katja Gravenhorst,&nbsp;Katharina Janke,&nbsp;Adetayo Safiriyu Kasim,&nbsp;Victoria McGowan,&nbsp;Ruth Ponsford,&nbsp;Joanna Reynolds,&nbsp;Margaret Whitehead","doi":"10.3310/GRMA6711","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/GRMA6711","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Most research on community empowerment provides evidence on engaging communities for health promotion purposes rather than attempts to create empowering conditions. This study addresses this gap.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Big Local started in 2010 with £271M from the National Lottery. Ending in 2026, it gives 150 relatively disadvantaged communities in England control over £1M to improve their neighbourhoods.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate health and social outcomes, at the population level and among engaged residents, of the community engagement approach adopted in a place-based empowerment initiative.</p><p><strong>Study design, data sources and outcome variables: </strong>This study reports on the third wave of a longitudinal mixed-methods evaluation. Work package 1 used a difference-in-differences design to investigate the impact of Big Local on population outcomes in all 150 Big Local areas compared to matched comparator areas using secondary data. The primary outcome was anxiety; secondary outcomes included a population mental health measure and crime in the neighbourhood. Work package 2 assessed active engagement in Big Local using cross-sectional data and nested cohort data from a biannual survey of Big Local partnership members. The primary outcome was mental well-being and the secondary outcome was self-rated health. Work package 3 conducted qualitative research in 14 Big Local neighbourhoods and nationally to understand pathways to impact. Work package 4 undertook a cost-benefit analysis using the life satisfaction approach to value the benefits of Big Local, which used the work package 1 estimate of Big Local impact on life satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At a population level, the impacts on 'reporting high anxiety' (-0.8 percentage points, 95% confidence interval -2.4 to 0.7) and secondary outcomes were not statistically significant, except burglary (-0.054 change in <i>z</i>-score, 95% confidence interval -0.100 to -0.009). There was some effect on reduced anxiety after 2017. Areas progressing fastest had a statistically significant reduction in population mental health measure (-0.053 change in <i>z</i>-score, 95% confidence interval -0.103 to -0.002). Mixed results were found among engaged residents, including a significant increase in mental well-being in Big Local residents in the nested cohort in 2018, but not by 2020; this is likely to be COVID-19. More highly educated residents, and males, were more likely to report a significant improvement in mental well-being. Qualitative accounts of positive impacts on mental well-being are often related to improved social connectivity and physical/material environments. Qualitative data revealed increasing capabilities for residents' collective control. Some negative impacts were reported, with local factors sometimes undermining residents' ability to exercise collective control. Finally, on the most conservative","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 9","pages":"1-147"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71489791","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Green-blue space exposure changes and impact on individual-level well-being and mental health: a population-wide dynamic longitudinal panel study with linked survey data.","authors":"Rebecca S Geary,&nbsp;Daniel A Thompson,&nbsp;Joanne K Garrett,&nbsp;Amy Mizen,&nbsp;Francis M Rowney,&nbsp;Jiao Song,&nbsp;Mathew P White,&nbsp;Rebecca Lovell,&nbsp;Alan Watkins,&nbsp;Ronan A Lyons,&nbsp;Susan Williams,&nbsp;Gareth Stratton,&nbsp;Ashley Akbari,&nbsp;Sarah C Parker,&nbsp;Mark J Nieuwenhuijsen,&nbsp;James White,&nbsp;Benedict W Wheeler,&nbsp;Richard Fry,&nbsp;Dialechti Tsimpida,&nbsp;Sarah E Rodgers","doi":"10.3310/LQPT9410","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/LQPT9410","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cross-sectional evidence suggests that living near green and blue spaces benefits mental health; longitudinal evidence is limited.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To quantify the impact of changes in green and blue spaces on common mental health disorders, well-being and health service use.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A retrospective, dynamic longitudinal panel study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Wales, UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>An e-cohort comprising 99,682,902 observations of 2,801,483 adults (≥ 16 years) registered with a general practice in Wales (2008-2019). A 5312-strong 'National Survey for Wales (NSW) subgroup' was surveyed on well-being and visits to green and blue spaces.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Common mental health disorders, general practice records; subjective well-being, Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Common mental health disorder and use of general practice services were extracted quarterly from the Welsh Longitudinal General Practice Dataset. Annual ambient greenness exposure, enhanced vegetation index and access to green and blue spaces (2018) from planning and satellite data. Data were linked within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multilevel regression models examined associations between exposure to green and blue spaces and common mental health disorders and use of general practice. For the National Survey for Wales subgroup, generalised linear models examined associations between exposure to green and blue spaces and subjective well-being and common mental health disorders.</p><p><strong>Results and conclusions: </strong>Our longitudinal analyses found no evidence that changes in green and blue spaces through time impacted on common mental health disorders. However, time-aggregated exposure to green and blue spaces contrasting differences between people were associated with subsequent common mental health disorders. Similarly, our cross-sectional findings add to growing evidence that residential green and blue spaces and visits are associated with well-being benefits: Greater ambient greenness (+ 1 enhanced vegetation index) was associated with lower likelihood of subsequently seeking care for a common mental health disorder [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval, (CI) 0.80 to 0.81] and with well-being with a U-shaped relationship [Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale; enhanced vegetation index beta (adjusted) -10.15, 95% CI -17.13 to -3.17; EVI² beta (quadratic term; adj.) 12.49, 95% CI 3.02 to 21.97]. Those who used green and blue spaces for leisure reported better well-being, with diminishing extra benefit with increasing time (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale: time outdoors (hours) beta 0.88, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.24, time outdoors² beta -0.06, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.01) and had 4% lower odds of seekin","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 10","pages":"1-176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71489790","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"School-based relationship and sexuality education intervention engaging adolescent boys for the reductions of teenage pregnancy: the JACK cluster RCT.","authors":"Maria Lohan, Kathryn Gillespie, Áine Aventin, Aisling Gough, Emily Warren, Ruth Lewis, Kelly Buckley, Theresa McShane, Aoibheann Brennan-Wilson, Susan Lagdon, Linda Adara, Lisa McDaid, Rebecca French, Honor Young, Clíona McDowell, Danielle Logan, Sorcha Toase, Rachael M Hunter, Andrea Gabrio, Mike Clarke, Liam O'Hare, Chris Bonell, Julia V Bailey, James White","doi":"10.3310/YWXQ8757","DOIUrl":"10.3310/YWXQ8757","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The need to engage boys in gender-transformative relationships and sexuality education (RSE) to reduce adolescent pregnancy is endorsed by the World Health Organization and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effects of <i>If I Were Jack</i> on the avoidance of unprotected sex and other sexual health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A cluster randomised trial, incorporating health economics and process evaluations.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Sixty-six schools across the four nations of the UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Students aged 13-14 years.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>A school-based, teacher-delivered, gender-transformative RSE intervention (<i>If I Were Jack</i>) versus standard RSE.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Self-reported avoidance of unprotected sex (sexual abstinence or reliable contraceptive use at last sex) after 12-14 months. Secondary outcomes included knowledge, attitudes, skills, intentions and sexual behaviours.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis population comprised 6556 students: 86.6% of students in the intervention group avoided unprotected sex, compared with 86.4% in the control group {adjusted odds ratio 0.85 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.26], <i>p</i> = 0.42}. An exploratory post hoc analysis showed no difference for sexual abstinence [78.30% intervention group vs. 78.25% control group; adjusted odds ratio 0.85 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.24), <i>p</i> = 0.39], but more intervention group students than control group students used reliable contraception at last sex [39.62% vs. 26.36%; adjusted odds ratio 0.52 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.920), <i>p</i> = 0.025]. Students in schools allocated to receive the intervention had significantly higher scores on knowledge [adjusted mean difference 0.18 (95% CI 0.024 to 0.34), <i>p</i> = 0.02], gender-equitable attitudes and intentions to avoid unintended pregnancy [adjusted mean difference 0.61 (95% CI 0.16 to 1.07), <i>p</i> = 0.01] than students in schools allocated to receive the control. There were positive but non-significant differences in sexual self-efficacy and communication skills. The total mean incremental cost of the intervention compared with standard RSE was £2.83 (95% CI -£2.64 to £8.29) per student. Over a 20-year time horizon, the intervention is likely to be cost-effective owing to its impact on unprotected sex because it would result in 379 (95% CI 231 to 477) fewer unintended pregnancies, 680 (95% CI 189 to 1467) fewer sexually transmitted infections and a gain of 10 (95% CI 5 to 16) quality-adjusted life-years per 100,000 students for a cost saving of £9.89 (95% CI -£15.60 to -£3.83).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The trial is underpowered to detect some effects because four schools withdrew and the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.12) was larger than that in sample size calculation (0","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 8","pages":"1-139"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41176110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A multicomponent intervention to reduce daily sitting time in office workers: the SMART Work & Life three-arm cluster RCT.","authors":"Charlotte L Edwardson, Benjamin D Maylor, Stuart Jh Biddle, Stacy A Clemes, Edward Cox, Melanie J Davies, David W Dunstan, Helen Eborall, Malcolm H Granat, Laura J Gray, Michelle Hadjiconstantinou, Genevieve N Healy, Nishal Bhupendra Jaicim, Sarah Lawton, Panna Mandalia, Fehmidah Munir, Gerry Richardson, Simon Walker, Thomas Yates, Alexandra M Clarke-Cornwell","doi":"10.3310/DNYC2141","DOIUrl":"10.3310/DNYC2141","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Office workers spend 70-85% of their time at work sitting. High levels of sitting have been linked to poor physiological and psychological health. Evidence shows the need for fully powered randomised controlled trials, with long-term follow-up, to test the effectiveness of interventions to reduce sitting time.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Our objective was to test the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SMART Work & Life intervention, delivered with and without a height-adjustable workstation, compared with usual practice at 12-month follow-up.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A three-arm cluster randomised controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Councils in England.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Office workers.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>SMART Work & Life is a multicomponent intervention that includes behaviour change strategies, delivered by workplace champions. Clusters were randomised to (1) the SMART Work & Life intervention, (2) the SMART Work & Life intervention with a height-adjustable workstation (i.e. SMART Work & Life plus desk) or (3) a control group (i.e. usual practice). Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 12 months.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was device-assessed daily sitting time compared with usual practice at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included sitting, standing, stepping time, physical activity, adiposity, blood pressure, biochemical measures, musculoskeletal issues, psychosocial variables, work-related health, diet and sleep. Cost-effectiveness and process evaluation data were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 78 clusters (756 participants) were randomised [control, 26 clusters (<i>n =</i> 267); SMART Work & Life only, 27 clusters (<i>n =</i> 249); SMART Work & Life plus desk, 25 clusters (<i>n =</i> 240)]. At 12 months, significant differences between groups were found in daily sitting time, with participants in the SMART Work & Life-only and SMART Work & Life plus desk arms sitting 22.2 minutes per day (97.5% confidence interval -38.8 to -5.7 minutes/day; <i>p =</i> 0.003) and 63.7 minutes per day (97.5% confidence interval -80.0 to -47.4 minutes/day; <i>p</i> < 0.001), respectively, less than the control group. Participants in the SMART Work & Life plus desk arm sat 41.7 minutes per day (95% confidence interval -56.3 to -27.0 minutes/day; <i>p</i> < 0.001) less than participants in the SMART Work & Life-only arm. Sitting time was largely replaced by standing time, and changes in daily behaviour were driven by changes during work hours on workdays. Behaviour changes observed at 12 months were similar to 3 months. At 12 months, small improvements were seen for stress, well-being and vigour in both intervention groups, and for pain in the lower extremity and social norms in the SMART Work & Life plus desk group. Results from the process evaluation supported these findi","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 6","pages":"1-229"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41161282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effects of reduced-risk nicotine-delivery products on smoking prevalence and cigarette sales: an observational study.","authors":"Francesca Pesola,&nbsp;Anna Phillips-Waller,&nbsp;Emma Beard,&nbsp;Lion Shahab,&nbsp;David Sweanor,&nbsp;Martin Jarvis,&nbsp;Peter Hajek","doi":"10.3310/RPDN7327","DOIUrl":"10.3310/RPDN7327","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is not currently clear what impact alternative nicotine-delivery products (electronic cigarettes, heated tobacco products and snus) have on smoking rates and cigarette sales.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess whether access to these products promotes smoking in the population.</p><p><strong>Design and data sources: </strong>We examined associations of alternative nicotine product use and sales with smoking rates and cigarette sales overall, and in different age and socioeconomic groups, and compared smoking prevalence over time in countries with contrasting regulations of these products. For electronic cigarettes, we examined data from countries with historically similar smoking trajectories but differing current electronic cigarette regulations (United Kingdom and United States of America vs. Australia, where sales of nicotine-containing electronic cigarettes are banned); for heated tobacco, we used data from countries with state tobacco monopolies, where cigarette and heated tobacco sales data are available (Japan, South Korea), and for snus we used data from Sweden.</p><p><strong>Analysis methods: </strong>We pre-specified dynamic time series analyses to explore associations between use and sales of alternative nicotine-delivery products and smoking prevalence and cigarette sales, and time series analyses to compare trends of smoking prevalence in countries with different nicotine product policies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Because of data and analysis limitations (see below), results are only tentative and need to be interpreted with caution. Only a few findings reached statistical significance and for most results the Bayes factor indicated inconclusive evidence. We did not find an association between rates of smoking and rates of the use of alternative nicotine products. The increase in heated tobacco product sales in Japan was accompanied by a decrease in cigarette sales. The decline in smoking prevalence seems to have been slower in Australia than in the United Kingdom overall, and slower than in both the United Kingdom and the United States of America among young people and also in lower socioeconomic groups. The decline in cigarette sales has also accelerated faster in the United Kingdom than in Australia.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Most of the available data had insufficient data points for robust time series analyses. The assumption of our statistical approach that causal interactions are more likely to be detected when longer-term changes are screened out may not apply for short time series and in product interaction scenarios, where short-term fluctuations can be caused by, for example, fluctuations in prosperity or product supplies. In addition, due to dual use, prevalence figures for smoking and alternative product use overlap. The ecological study design limits the causal inferences that can be made. Longer time periods are needed for any effects of exclusive use of the ","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 7","pages":"1-39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41172092","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impacts of EU Tobacco Products Directive regulations on use of e-cigarettes in adolescents in Great Britain: a natural experiment evaluation.","authors":"Graham Moore, Britt Hallingberg, Rachel Brown, Jennifer McKell, Jordan Van Godwin, Linda Bauld, Linsay Gray, Olivia Maynard, Anne-Marie Mackintosh, Marcus Munafò, Anna Blackwell, Emily Lowthian, Nicholas Page","doi":"10.3310/WTMH3198","DOIUrl":"10.3310/WTMH3198","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>E-cigarettes are a popular smoking-cessation tool. Although less harmful than tobacco, use of e-cigarettes by non-smokers should be prevented. There is concern about the use of e-cigarettes by young people and that e-cigarettes may renormalise smoking. In May 2016, Tobacco Products Directive regulations aimed to reduce e-cigarettes' appeal to young people.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To examine the effects of the Tobacco Products Directive regulations on young people's use of e-cigarettes, and the role of e-cigarettes in renormalising smoking.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A mixed-method natural experimental evaluation combining secondary analyses of survey data, with process evaluation, including interviews with young people, policy stakeholders, retailers and trading standards observers, and observations of retail settings.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>Wales, Scotland and England.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Survey participants were aged 13-15 years, living in England, Scotland or Wales and participated in routinely conducted surveys from 1998 to 2019. Process evaluation participants included 14- to 15-year-olds in England, Scotland and Wales, policy stakeholders, trading standards offices and retailers.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Regulation of e-cigarettes, including bans on cross-border advertising, health warnings and restrictions on product strength.</p><p><strong>Comparison group: </strong>Interrupted time series design, with baseline trends as the comparator.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was ever e-cigarette use. Secondary outcomes included regular use, ever and regular smoking, smoking attitudes, alcohol and cannabis use.</p><p><strong>Data capture and analysis: </strong>Our primary statistical analysis used data from Wales, including 91,687 young people from the 2013-19 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children and School Health Research Network surveys. In Scotland, we used the Scottish Schools Adolescent Lifestyle and Substance Use Survey and in England we used the Smoking Drinking and Drug Use surveys. The process evaluation included interviews with 73 young people in 2017 and 148 young people in 2018, 12 policy stakeholders, 13 trading standards officers and 27 retailers. We observed 30 retail premises before and after implementation. Data were integrated using the Medical Research Council's process evaluation framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ever smoking continued to decline alongside the emergence of e-cigarettes, with a slight slowing in decline for regular use. Tobacco Products Directive regulations were described by stakeholders as well implemented, and observations indicated good compliance. Young people described e-cigarettes as a fad and indicated limited interaction with the components of the Tobacco Products Directive regulations. In primary statistical analyses in Wales [i.e. short (to 2017) and long term (to 2019)], gro","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 5","pages":"1-102"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9879345","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Exploring the relationship between working from home, mental and physical health and wellbeing: a systematic review.","authors":"Lindsay Blank,&nbsp;Emma Hock,&nbsp;Anna Cantrell,&nbsp;Susan Baxter,&nbsp;Elizabeth Goyder","doi":"10.3310/AHFF6175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/AHFF6175","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding the impact of working from home on health and wellbeing is of great interest to employers and employees alike, with a strong need for up-to-date guidance. The aim of this systematic review was to identify, appraise and synthesise existing research evidence that explores the impact of home working on health and wellbeing outcomes for working people and health inequalities in the population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review of qualitative, quantitative and observational studies. We searched databases, reference lists and UK grey literature and completed citation searching of included papers. We extracted and tabulated key data from the included papers and synthesised narratively. Factors associated with the health and wellbeing of people working at home reported in the literature were displayed by constructing mind maps of each individual factor which had been identified. The findings were combined with an a priori model to develop a final model, which was validated in consultation with stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 96 studies which were found to meet the inclusion criteria for the review, 30 studies were published before the COVID-19 pandemic and a further 66 were published during the pandemic. The quality of evidence was limited by the study designs employed by the authors, with the majority of studies being cross-sectional surveys (<i>n</i> = 59). For the most part, for studies which collected quantitative data, measures were self-reported. The largest volume of evidence identified consisted of studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic which looked at factors which influence the relationship between working from home and measures relating to mental health and wellbeing. Fifteen studies which considered the potential for working at home to have different effects for different subgroups suggested that working at home may have more negative consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic for women and in particular, mothers. There was very little evidence on age (two studies), ethnicity (one study), education or income (two studies) in terms of moderating home working effects, and very limited evidence from before the COVID-19 pandemic. The concept of enforced working from home and having 'no choice' was reported in only one paper prior to the pandemic and two papers reporting on working from home as a result of COVID-19. However, the concept of lack of choice around working from home was implicit in much of the literature - even though it was not directly measured. There were no clear patterns of wellbeing measures which changed from positive to negative association (or vice versa) during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The quality of the evidence base was very much limited by study designs, particularly for studies published during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the majority of studies consisting of data collected by cross-sectional surv","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 4","pages":"1-100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9879346","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impact of a social prescribing intervention in North East England on adults with type 2 diabetes: the SPRING_NE multimethod study.","authors":"Suzanne Moffatt,&nbsp;John Wildman,&nbsp;Tessa M Pollard,&nbsp;Kate Gibson,&nbsp;Josephine M Wildman,&nbsp;Nicola O'Brien,&nbsp;Bethan Griffith,&nbsp;Stephanie L Morris,&nbsp;Eoin Moloney,&nbsp;Jayne Jeffries,&nbsp;Mark Pearce,&nbsp;Wael Mohammed","doi":"10.3310/AQXC8219","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/AQXC8219","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Link worker social prescribing enables health-care professionals to address patients' non-medical needs by linking patients into various services. Evidence for its effectiveness and how it is experienced by link workers and clients is lacking.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the impact and costs of a link worker social prescribing intervention on health and health-care costs and utilisation and to observe link worker delivery and patient engagement.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Quality Outcomes Framework and Secondary Services Use data.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Multimethods comprising (1) quasi-experimental evaluation of effects of social prescribing on health and health-care use, (2) cost-effectiveness analysis, (3) ethnographic methods to explore intervention delivery and receipt, and (4) a supplementary interview study examining intervention impact during the first UK COVID-19 lockdown (April-July 2020).</p><p><strong>Study population and setting: </strong>Community-dwelling adults aged 40-74 years with type 2 diabetes and link workers in a socioeconomically deprived locality of North East England, UK.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Link worker social prescribing to improve health and well-being-related outcomes among people with long-term conditions.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>(1) Health outcomes study, approximately <i>n</i> = 8400 patients; EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version (EQ-5D-5L), study, <i>n</i> = 694 (baseline) and <i>n</i> = 474 (follow-up); (2) ethnography, <i>n</i> = 20 link workers and <i>n</i> = 19 clients; and COVID-19 interviews, <i>n</i> = 14 staff and <i>n</i> = 44 clients.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The main outcome measures were glycated haemoglobin level (HbA_1c; primary outcome), body mass index, blood pressure, cholesterol level, smoking status, health-care costs and utilisation, and EQ-5D-5L score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intention-to-treat analysis of approximately 8400 patients in 13 intervention and 11 control general practices demonstrated a statistically significant, although not clinically significant, difference in HbA_1c level (-1.11 mmol/mol) and a non-statistically significant 1.5-percentage-point reduction in the probability of having high blood pressure, but no statistically significant effects on other outcomes. Health-care cost estimates ranged from £18.22 (individuals with one extra comorbidity) to -£50.35 (individuals with no extra comorbidity). A statistically non-significant shift from unplanned (non-elective and accident and emergency admissions) to planned care (elective and outpatient care) was observed. Subgroup analysis showed more benefit for individuals living in more deprived areas, for the ethnically white and those with fewer comorbidities. The mean cost of the intervention itself was £1345 per participant; the incremental mean health gain was 0.004 quality-adjus","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 2","pages":"1-185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9685414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A multicomponent psychosocial intervention to reduce substance use by adolescents involved in the criminal justice system: the RISKIT-CJS RCT.","authors":"Simon Coulton, Olena Nizalova, Tracy Pellatt-Higgins, Alex Stevens, Nadine Hendrie, Catherine Marchand, Rosa Vass, Paolo Deluca, Colin Drummond, Jennifer Ferguson, Gillian Waller, Dorothy Newbury-Birch","doi":"10.3310/FKPY6814","DOIUrl":"10.3310/FKPY6814","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Substance use and offending are related in the context of other disinhibitory behaviours. Adolescents involved in the criminal justice system constitute a particularly vulnerable group, with a propensity to engage in risky behaviour that has long-term impact on their future health and well-being. Previous research of the RISKIT programme provided evidence of a potential effect in reducing substance use and risky behaviour in adolescents.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent psychosocial intervention compared with treatment as usual in reducing substance use for substance-using adolescents involved in the criminal justice system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design: &lt;/strong&gt;A mixed-methods, prospective, pragmatic, two-arm, randomised controlled trial with follow-up at 6 and 12 months post randomisation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Setting: &lt;/strong&gt;The study was conducted across youth offending teams, pupil referral units and substance misuse teams across four areas of England (i.e. South East, London, North West, North East).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Participants: &lt;/strong&gt;Adolescents aged between 13 and 17 years (inclusive), recruited between September 2017 and June 2020.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;Participants were randomised to treatment as usual or to treatment as usual in addition to the RISKIT-Criminal Justice System (RISKIT-CJS) programme. The RISKIT-CJS programme was a multicomponent intervention and consisted of two individual motivational interviews with a trained youth worker (lasting 45 minutes each) and two group sessions delivered over half a day on consecutive weeks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcome measures: &lt;/strong&gt;At 12 months, we assessed per cent days abstinent from substance use over the previous 28 days. Secondary outcome measures included well-being, motivational state, situational confidence, quality of life, resource use and fidelity of interventions delivered.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;A total of 693 adolescents were assessed for eligibility, of whom 505 (73%) consented. Of these, 246 (49%) were allocated to the RISKIT-CJS intervention and 259 (51%) were allocated to treatment as usual only. At month 12, the overall follow-up rate was 57%: 55% in the RISKIT-CJS arm and 59% in the treatment-as-usual arm. At month 12, we observed an increase in per cent days abstinent from substances in both arms of the study, from 61% to 85%, but there was no evidence that the RISKIT-CJS intervention was superior to treatment as usual. A similar pattern was observed for secondary outcomes. The RISKIT-CJS intervention was not found to be any more cost-effective than treatment as usual. The qualitative research indicated that young people were positive about learning new skills and acquiring new knowledge. Although stakeholders considered the intervention worthwhile, they expressed concern that it came too late for the target population.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Limit","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"11 3","pages":"1-77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9692223","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}