Relational community engagement within health interventions at varied outcome scales.

Relational community engagement may be a powerful approach with multiple health outcomes. Relational community engagement has the potential to promote health and involves collaborative efforts between multiple stakeholders. The COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted the centrality of community engagement in health crises. Challenges continue to persist, however, in genuinely engaging and empowering communities for better health outcomes. Understanding the multi-level and complex relational nature of community engagement is essential to comprehend its influence on health at micro, meso, and macro scales of influence. The purpose of this narrative review was to synthesize the literature on relational community engagement within varied health interventions at the three major system levels (micro, meso, and macro) to support the development of future research agendas. At the micro level, relational community engagement interventions demonstrated a range of positive outcomes including: increased sense of control, satisfaction, positive behavior, improved knowledge, behavior change, empowerment, and overall positive health and social outcomes. At the meso level, relational community engagement interventions resulted in increased trust between stakeholders and groups/teams, and increased community senses of ownership of interventions, decisions, structures. At the macro level, relational community engagement interventions influenced broader societal factors and had positive impacts on health policy and governance including collaboration between sectors and communities as well as increased access to services. The review highlights the potential versatility and effectiveness of interventions that prioritize relationships, health promotion, and social change while underscoring the significance of holistic and community-centered approaches in addressing diverse health and social challenges.

Unfavourable beliefs about oral health and safety of dental care during pregnancy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Oral conditions such as gingivitis and periodontitis are correlated with adverse pregnancy outcomes such as preeclampsia, preterm birth and low birth weight. Oral health-related unfavourable beliefs can have negative influences on oral health behaviours including hesitation in accessing preventative dental treatments and dental service utilization. The objective of this systematic review was to examine unfavourable beliefs that expectant or new mothers frequently hold about oral health and the safety of dental care during pregnancy. METHODS: An electronic database search on PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and MEDLINE (Ovid) followed by forward and backward citation tracing of the included studies was conducted. All English primary studies regardless of the year of publication were independently screened by two reviewers to identify studies addressing unfavourable beliefs about oral health and dental care during pregnancy. The CLARITY tool was applied to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. RESULTS: Out of a total of 5766 records, 39 quantitative and six qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria. The commonly held unfavourable beliefs were regarding the safety of dental services utilization and dental treatment procedures, the adverse impacts of pregnancy on oral health, and oral hygiene necessity during pregnancy. The most discussed unfavourable beliefs included "pregnant women lose their teeth because of pregnancy" (n = 18), "dental treatments are not safe and harm the fetus" (n = 17), and "the developing baby absorbs calcium from the mother's teeth" (n = 14). CONCLUSIONS: Unfavourable beliefs about oral health and dental care utilization are common among pregnant women and new mothers. The literature suggests that a low level of oral health knowledge and seeking information from social networks can contribute to such beliefs. This has implications for health promotion.

Prospective evaluation of pregnancy outcomes after gestational exposure to prazosin.

AIMS: Prazosin is an antihypertensive medication which can be used to help with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Little data is currently available on its safety in pregnancy. The aim of this study was to assess the fetal and pregnancy safety associated with prazosin exposures in early pregnancy. METHODS: Subjects were 11 patients who took prazosin during pregnancy and were counselled at the FRAME clinic in London Health Sciences Centre (Ontario, Canada) between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2021. Data on their other exposures and pregnancy outcomes were collected from medical records and through telephone questionnaires. RESULTS: It was found that 6/11 (54.5%) subjects did not report any adverse outcomes and experienced uneventful pregnancies. There were two miscarriages. Birthweights were within the normal range for the remaining nine pregnancies. Adverse events reported were consistent with background population expectation, including: one postpartum haemorrhage, one case of preeclampsia, one preterm birth, two NICU admissions, and two caesarean sections. CONCLUSIONS: For these 11 subjects, pregnancy outcomes after exposure to prazosin were consistent with typical outcomes from unexposed pregnancies. More data are needed to conclude that prazosin is safe for use in pregnant subjects. However, the lack of adverse effects above baseline is reassuring to future patients who may be unintentionally exposed to prazosin while pregnant. Therefore, this study contributes valuable data towards monitoring safety of prazosin in pregnancy.