Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of the BETTER intervention for chronic disease prevention and screening by public health nurses in low income neighbourhoods: views of community residents.

BACKGROUND: The BETTER intervention is an effective comprehensive evidence-based program for chronic disease prevention and screening (CDPS) delivered by trained prevention practitioners (PPs), a new role in primary care. An adapted program, BETTER HEALTH, delivered by public health nurses as PPs for community residents in low income neighbourhoods, was recently shown to be effective in improving CDPS actions. To obtain a nuanced understanding about the CDPS needs of community residents and how the BETTER HEALTH intervention was perceived by residents, we studied how the intervention was adapted to a public health setting then conducted a post-visit qualitative evaluation by community residents through focus groups and interviews. METHODS: We first used the ADAPT-ITT model to adapt BETTER for a public health setting in Ontario, Canada. For the post-PP visit qualitative evaluation, we asked community residents who had received a PP visit, about steps they had taken to improve their physical and mental health and the BETTER HEALTH intervention. For both phases, we conducted focus groups and interviews; transcripts were analyzed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Thirty-eight community residents participated in either adaptation (n = 14, 64% female; average age 54 y) or evaluation (n = 24, 83% female; average age 60 y) phases. In both adaptation and evaluation, residents described significant challenges including poverty, social isolation, and daily stress, making chronic disease prevention a lower priority. Adaptation results indicated that residents valued learning about CDPS and would attend a confidential visit with a public health nurse who was viewed as trustworthy. Despite challenges, many recipients of BETTER HEALTH perceived they had achieved at least one personal CDPS goal post PP visit. Residents described key relational aspects of the visit including feeling valued, listened to and being understood by the PP. The PPs also provided practical suggestions to overcome barriers to meeting prevention goals. CONCLUSIONS: Residents living in low income neighbourhoods faced daily stress that reduced their capacity to make preventive lifestyle changes. Key adapted features of BETTER HEALTH such as public health nurses as PPs were highly supported by residents. The intervention was perceived valuable for the community by providing access to disease prevention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: #NCT03052959, 10/02/2017.

BETTER HEALTH: Durham -- protocol for a cluster randomized trial of BETTER in community and public health settings.

BACKGROUND: The Building on Existing Tools to Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening (BETTER) cluster randomized trial in primary care settings demonstrated a 30% improvement in adherence to evidence-based Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening (CDPS) activities. CDPS activities included healthy activities, lifestyle modifications, and screening tests. We present a protocol for the adaptation of BETTER to a public health setting, and testing the adaptation in a cluster randomized trial (BETTER HEALTH: Durham) among low income neighbourhoods in Durham Region, Ontario (Canada). METHODS: The BETTER intervention consists of a personalized prevention visit between a participant and a prevention practitioner, which is focused on the participant's eligible CDPS activities, and uses Brief Action Planning, to empower the participant to set achievable short-term goals. BETTER HEALTH: Durham aims to establish that the BETTER intervention can be adapted and proven effective among 40-64 year old residents of low income areas when provided in the community by public health nurses trained as prevention practitioners. Focus groups and key informant interviews among stakeholders and eligible residents of low income areas will inform the adaptation, along with feedback from the trial's Community Advisory Committee. We have created a sampling frame of 16 clusters composed of census dissemination areas in the lowest urban quintile of median household income, and will sample 10 clusters to be randomly allocated to immediate intervention or six month wait list control. Accounting for the clustered design effect, the trial will have 80% power to detect an absolute 30% difference in the primary outcome, a composite score of completed eligible CDPS actions six months after enrollment. The prevention practitioner will attempt to link participants without a primary care provider (PCP) to a local PCP. The implementation of BETTER HEALTH: Durham will be evaluated by focus groups and key informant interviews. DISCUSSION: The effectiveness of BETTER HEALTH: Durham will be tested for delivery in low income neighbourhoods by a public health department. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03052959, registered February 10, 2017.

Modelling COVID-19 transmission using IDSIM, an epidemiological-modelling desktop app with multi-level immunization capabilities.

Background: : The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed unprecedented demands on local public health units in Ontario, Canada, one of which was the need for in-house epidemiological modelling capabilities. The objective of this study is to develop a native Windows desktop app for epidemiological modelling, to be used by public health unit epidemiologists to predict COVID-19 transmission in Durham Region. Methods: : The developed app is an implementation of a multi-stratified compartmental epidemiological model that can accommodate multiple virus variants and levels of vaccination, as well as public health measures such as physical distancing, contact tracing followed by quarantine and testing followed by isolation. It was used to investigate the effects of different factors on COVID-19 transmission, including vaccination coverage, vaccine effectiveness, waning of vaccine-induced immunity and the advent of the Omicron variant. The simulation start date was November 22, 2021. Results: : For the Delta variant, at least 90% of the population would need to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. A Delta-variant-only epidemiological curve would be flattened from the start in the absence of immunity waning and within six months in the presence of immunity waning. The percentage of infections caused by the Omicron variant was forecast to increase from 1% to 97% in the first month of the simulation. Total Omicron infections were forecasted to be reduced, respectively, by 26% or 41% if 3,000 or 5,000 booster doses were administered per day. Conclusion: : For the Delta variant, both natural and vaccination-induced immunity are necessary to achieve herd immunity, and waning of vaccine-induced immunity lengthens the time necessary to reach herd immunity. In the absence of additional public health measures, a wave driven by the Omicron variant was predicted to pose significant public health challenges with infections predicted to peak in 2-3 months from the start of the simulation, depending on the rate of administration of booster doses.

Incidence of neural tube defects in Ontario, 1986-1999.

BACKGROUND: Prenatal screening and the promotion of folic acid intake could affect the incidence of neural tube defects (NTDs). We examined trends in the total NTD incidence, as detected in live births, stillbirths and therapeutic abortions, from 1986 to 1999 in Ontario. METHODS: To capture cases of NTDs we used data from the Canadian Congenital Anomalies Surveillance System and hospital data on therapeutic abortions. We calculated the total incidence of NTDs by combining the numbers of NTDs occurring in live births, stillbirths and therapeutic abortions. RESULTS: The total NTD incidence rate increased from 11.7 per 10,000 pregnancies in 1986 to 16.2 per 10,000 in 1995, and it subsequently decreased to 8.6 per 10,000 by 1999. The NTD birth rate (live births and stillbirths) decreased from 10.6 per 10,000 births in 1986 to 5.3 per 10,000 in 1999. The rate of therapeutic abortions with an NTD or hydrocephalus rose from 17.5 per 10,000 abortions in 1986 to 50.7 per 10,000 in 1995 and fell to 28.7 per 10,000 abortions in 1999. INTERPRETATION: The total NTD incidence rate increased from 1986 to 1995, probably because of increased prenatal screening and better detection of NTDs. The decline from 1995 to 1999 may have been due to increased folic acid intake among women at the time of conception.