The impact of a workplace cardiovascular health screening programme 'Farmers Have Hearts' on health behaviour change among Irish farmers.

BACKGROUND: Irish farmers are a high-risk group for cardiovascular disease (CVD) which imposes not only a risk to their health but has more far-reaching implications for occupational health and safety. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the impact of a workplace health screening and health behaviour change programme among a sub-group of male Irish farmers. METHODS: Data were collected from male livestock farmers (n = 310) who attended health screenings at livestock marts. Participating farmers also received lifestyle advice to prompt health behaviour change. Health behaviour change was tracked by two phone questionnaires at Week 1 (n = 224) and Week 12 (n = 172). All data were entered into SPSS v22 and analysed using chi-square and regression techniques. RESULTS: At Week 12, 48% reported having changed at least one health behaviour. The majority of farmers were referred to their GP and by Week 12, 32% had acted on this advice. Participants most in need of health behaviour change based on adverse health screening results were, paradoxically, the least likely to contemplate or engage in health behaviour change. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate that whilst workplace health screenings can be a catalyst for behaviour change for some farmers, more follow-up supports are needed to encourage sustainable behaviour change.

From training to practice: the impact of ENGAGE, Ireland's national men's health training programme.

Ireland's National Men's Health Policy recommended developing training programmes tailored to the needs of those working in health and allied health professionals and ENGAGE was developed to meet that recommendation. This study evaluated the impact of ENGAGE on frontline service providers' self-reported knowledge, skills, capacity and practice up to 5-months post training. Between 2012 and 2015, ENGAGE Trainers (n = 57) delivered 62 1-day training programmes to 810 participants. This study was conducted on a subset of those training days (n = 26) and participants. Quantitative methodologies were used to collect pre (n = 295), post (n = 295) and 5-month post (n = 128) training questionnaire data. Overall, participants were highly satisfied with the training immediately post training (8.60 ± 1.60 out of 10) and at 5-month follow up (8.06 ± 1.43 out of 10). Participants' self-reported level of knowledge, skill and capacity in identifying priorities, engaging men and influencing practice beyond their own organisation increased immediately following training (P < 0.001) and, with the exception of improving capacity to engage men and influencing practice beyond their organisation, these improvements were sustained at 5-month post training (P < 0.001). The vast majority of service providers (93.4%) reported that ENGAGE had impacted their work practice up to 5-month post training. The findings suggest that ENGAGE has succeeded in improving service providers' capacity to engage and work with men; improving gender competency in the delivery of health and health related services may increase the utilisation of such services by men and thereby improve health outcomes for men.

Comparison of uptake of colorectal cancer screening based on fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in males and females: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in males and the second in females worldwide. Incidence and mortality are higher in men than women. Colorectal cancer screening is effective in reducing mortality. Internationally, fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is increasingly being recommended as the primary screening test. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine whether uptake of FIT screening differs between men than women. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase for peer-reviewed articles published in English during 2000-2013 for randomized controlled trials (RCT) or observational studies of screening using FIT that quantified numbers invited and participating by gender. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. RESULTS: Six hundred and eighty-five citations were identified, 19 meeting the inclusion criteria. Random effects meta-analysis found male uptake was significantly lower than female uptake [odds ratio (OR), 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.75-0.95; P < 0.01]. This generally persisted throughout subgroup analysis of study design (RCTs vs. observational studies and study quality), screening organization (methods of invitation, number of samples, age range of screening, recommendations, and reminders), and setting. CONCLUSIONS: Meta analysis of FIT screening studies indicates significantly lower uptake among men. IMPACT: Further investigation is required into factors influencing acceptability and participation of FIT screening in both sexes.