Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Nutrients ; 14(9)2022 Apr 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35565837

RESUMO

In the United States, many communities lack sufficient access to fresh produce. To improve access to fresh fruits and vegetables, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) provides eligible participants vouchers through the Farmers Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) that can be redeemed directly from farmers at markets or farm stands. However, FMNP voucher redemption rates in New Jersey remain lower than those in neighboring states. This article used the social ecological model to examine differences between FMNP participants who redeem vouchers (Redeemers) and those who do not (non-Redeemers) in the areas of: produce procurement practices and consumption frequency, and barriers to and facilitators of FMNP voucher redemption. This cross-sectional study included WIC FMNP participants (N = 329) in northern New Jersey, USA. Analyses were conducted using descriptive statistics, independent sample t-tests, and one-way ANOVA. Compared to Redeemers, non-Redeemers consumed fewer average daily vegetable servings, were more likely to shop at small grocery/corner stores, and encountered significant barriers to FMNP redemption, e.g., difficulty finding time to redeem vouchers.


Assuntos
Assistência Alimentar , Criança , Estudos Transversais , Fazendeiros , Feminino , Abastecimento de Alimentos , Frutas , Humanos , Lactente , Verduras
2.
Environ Manage ; 63(5): 691-701, 2019 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30877367

RESUMO

Despite their true exposure, individuals with Comparative Optimism consider themselves less prone to the adverse health effects of pollution. Since individuals' response to a given environmental risk is affected by their appraisal of the risk, those with Comparative Optimism may be less likely to engage in prescribed behaviors or to do so at the urgency required of the given risk. Such limited or delayed response can amplify the risk instead of reducing it. Thus, there is a need to understand if Comparative Optimism applies to pollutants with irreversible adverse health effects as it would impose a higher burden. There is also a need to know which segments of the population are prone to Comparative Optimism and how it manifests in terms of activities that can enhance exposure. Doing so will allow public health professionals address gaps in risk communication and management efforts and help improve environmental health outcomes. Using survey data, we assess the presence, behavioral and socioeconomic predictors, and implications of Comparative Optimism for communicating and managing lead exposure risk in an urban setting. Our results indicate that a large share of the population has Comparative Optimism for lead exposure, despite living in a city that has a relatively higher lead poisoning burden. We also found that ethnicity, income, length of stay at residence, among others, predict Comparative Optimism, suggesting that Comparative Optimism may predict elevated blood lead level.


Assuntos
Chumbo , Gestão de Riscos , Habitação , Humanos , Saúde Pública , Risco
3.
Health Technol Assess ; 22(59): 1-148, 2018 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30382016

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common and frequently fatal infection. Adjunctive rifampicin may enhance early S. aureus killing, sterilise infected foci and blood faster, and thereby reduce the risk of dissemination, metastatic infection and death. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether or not adjunctive rifampicin reduces bacteriological (microbiologically confirmed) failure/recurrence or death through 12 weeks from randomisation. Secondary objectives included evaluating the impact of rifampicin on all-cause mortality, clinically defined failure/recurrence or death, toxicity, resistance emergence, and duration of bacteraemia; and assessing the cost-effectiveness of rifampicin. DESIGN: Parallel-group, randomised (1 : 1), blinded, placebo-controlled multicentre trial. SETTING: UK NHS trust hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adult inpatients (≥ 18 years) with meticillin-resistant or susceptible S. aureus grown from one or more blood cultures, who had received < 96 hours of antibiotic therapy for the current infection, and without contraindications to rifampicin. INTERVENTIONS: Adjunctive rifampicin (600-900 mg/day, oral or intravenous) or placebo for 14 days in addition to standard antibiotic therapy. Investigators and patients were blinded to trial treatment. Follow-up was for 12 weeks (assessments at 3, 7, 10 and 14 days, weekly until discharge and final assessment at 12 weeks post randomisation). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was all-cause bacteriological (microbiologically confirmed) failure/recurrence or death through 12 weeks from randomisation. RESULTS: Between December 2012 and October 2016, 758 eligible participants from 29 UK hospitals were randomised: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. The median age was 65 years [interquartile range (IQR) 50-76 years]. A total of 485 (64.0%) infections were community acquired and 132 (17.4%) were nosocomial; 47 (6.2%) were caused by meticillin-resistant S. aureus. A total of 301 (39.7%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for a median of 29 days (IQR 18-45 days) and 619 (81.7%) participants received flucloxacillin. By 12 weeks, 62 out of 370 (16.8%) patients taking rifampicin versus 71 out of 388 (18.3%) participants taking the placebo experienced bacteriological (microbiologically confirmed) failure/recurrence or died [absolute risk difference -1.4%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.0% to 4.3%; hazard ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35; p = 0.81]. There were 4 (1.1%) and 5 (1.3%) bacteriological failures (p = 0.82) in the rifampicin and placebo groups, respectively. There were 3 (0.8%) versus 16 (4.1%) bacteriological recurrences (p = 0.01), and 55 (14.9%) versus 50 (12.9%) deaths without bacteriological failure/recurrence (p = 0.30) in the rifampicin and placebo groups, respectively. Over 12 weeks, there was no evidence of differences in clinically defined failure/recurrence/death (p = 0.84), all-cause mortality (p = 0.60), serious (p = 0.17) or grade 3/4 (p = 0.36) adverse events (AEs). However, 63 (17.0%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10.1%) participants in the placebo group experienced antibiotic or trial drug-modifying AEs (p = 0.004), and 24 (6.5%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 6 (1.5%) participants in the placebo group experienced drug-interactions (p = 0.0005). Evaluation of the costs and health-related quality-of-life impacts revealed that an episode of S. aureus bacteraemia costs an average of £12,197 over 12 weeks. Rifampicin was estimated to save 10% of episode costs (p = 0.14). After adjustment, the effect of rifampicin on total quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was positive (0.004 QALYs), but not statistically significant (standard error 0.004 QALYs). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S. aureus bacteraemia. FUTURE WORK: Given the substantial mortality, other antibiotic combinations or improved source management should be investigated. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN37666216, EudraCT 2012-000344-10 and Clinical Trials Authorisation 00316/0243/001. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 59. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Bacteriemia/tratamento farmacológico , Bacteriemia/mortalidade , Rifampina/uso terapêutico , Infecções Estafilocócicas/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Estafilocócicas/mortalidade , Idoso , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Antibacterianos/economia , Bacteriemia/microbiologia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Método Duplo-Cego , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana/efeitos dos fármacos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Gastos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Modelos Econométricos , Qualidade de Vida , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Rifampina/efeitos adversos , Rifampina/economia , Staphylococcus aureus , Reino Unido
4.
J Environ Manage ; 223: 868-877, 2018 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29986336

RESUMO

Small island developing states share as common constraints their small size, geographical dispersion, greater vulnerability to rapid and drastic environmental change, and limited administrative and technical resources. Within these, they have to cater for urban and agricultural areas, as well as enough natural landscape for ecosystem services. Funding for conservation of forest ecosystems on these islands has received relatively less attention and national park systems are chronically underfunded. We used Mauritius as a case study to investigate the willingness to pay for conservation of state and privately owned forests. It is part of a biodiversity hotspot with highly threatened forest ecosystems, but has known some conservation successes. We designed and administered survey based contingent valuation approach to estimate the willingness to pay entry fees to visit forest areas across the island. Study results suggest international and domestic tourists have a mean willingness to pay of USD 7.73 and USD 3.74 respectively, for conservation. These values represent amounts visitors are willing to pay every time they visit a public or private forested site. Results show that mid-level supervisory roles positively influence willingness to pay values. Results also show that people aged 50 and above, not having any supervisory role, married with one child or less, tend to have lower willingness to pay for conservation.


Assuntos
Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/economia , Financiamento Pessoal , Florestas , Adulto , Biodiversidade , Ecossistema , Humanos , Ilhas , Maurício , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inquéritos e Questionários
5.
Lancet ; 391(10121): 668-678, 2018 02 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29249276

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.


Assuntos
Antibióticos Antituberculose/administração & dosagem , Bacteriemia/tratamento farmacológico , Rifampina/administração & dosagem , Infecções Estafilocócicas/tratamento farmacológico , Administração Intravenosa , Administração Oral , Idoso , Antibióticos Antituberculose/farmacologia , Bacteriemia/microbiologia , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/tratamento farmacológico , Infecção Hospitalar/tratamento farmacológico , Método Duplo-Cego , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Rifampina/farmacologia , Falha de Tratamento
6.
J Environ Manage ; 184(Pt 1): 132-142, 2016 Dec 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27477350

RESUMO

Stakeholder engagement is a vital sustainable remediation practice for obtaining useful feedback and identifying societal needs. Evaluating and integrating risk perception of stakeholders into remediation and outreach efforts allows for greater insight, increases the likelihood of success and ultimately, benefits the community by protecting its members from environmental hazards. In this study, we identified risk perception factors that influenced residents' level of concern for mitigating their exposure to elevated concentrations of lead in household paint and historic fill material. Risk perception factors were assessed by an in-person survey conducted in public green spaces. The analysis of survey participants' responses indicated that their perception of risk to exposed lead was mostly influenced by the presence of hazardous materials in close proximity to their residence, the ability to address pollution, and awareness, interest, and individual accountability in mitigating environmental risks. Responses also revealed that residents considered risk of lead and soil pollution as less menacing than the presence of more immediate and perceptible risks posed by factors such as air and water pollution. In addition, the community seemed to exhibit "optimism bias" and did not identify itself at high risk to susceptible and immediate hazards, including lead exposure. This lack of concern over lead exposure created a significant obstacle to community participation in state-led education and outreach programs. By integrating risk perception analysis and increasing stakeholder engagement, we can bring more attention to this issue, educate the public about the threat of lead pollution, and efficiently use financial resources to implement a more sustainable solution.


Assuntos
Exposição Ambiental/análise , Chumbo/toxicidade , Opinião Pública , Gestão de Riscos/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Exposição Ambiental/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Habitação , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , New Jersey , Percepção , Características de Residência , Fatores de Risco , Inquéritos e Questionários , Poluição da Água
7.
Environ Manage ; 45(4): 697-710, 2010 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20140672

RESUMO

This article investigated public preferences for forest biomass based liquid biofuels, particularly ethanol blends of 10% (E10) and 85% (E85). We conducted a choice experiment study in three southern states in the United States: Arkansas, Florida, and Virginia. Reducing atmospheric CO(2), decreasing risk of wildfires and pest outbreaks, and enhancing biodiversity were presented to respondents as attributes of using biofuels. Results indicated that individuals had a positive extra willingness to pay (WTP) for both ethanol blends. The extra WTP was greater for higher blends that offered larger environment benefits. The WTPs for E10 were $0.56 gallon(-1), $0.58 gallon(-1), and $0.48 gallon(-1), and for E85 they were $0.82 gallon(-1), $1.17 gallon(-1), and $1.06 gallon(-1) in Arkansas, Florida, and Virginia, respectively. Although differences in WTP for E10 were statistically insignificant among the three states, significant differences were found in the WTP for E85 between AR and FL and between AR and VA. Preferences for the environmental attributes appeared to be heterogeneous, as respondents' were willing to pay a premium for E10 in all three states to facilitate the reduction of CO(2) and the improvement of biodiversity but were not willing to pay more for E85 in order to enhance biodiversity.


Assuntos
Biocombustíveis , Biomassa , Conservação de Recursos Energéticos , Política Pública , Árvores/crescimento & desenvolvimento , Biocombustíveis/economia , Conservação de Recursos Energéticos/economia , Conservação de Recursos Energéticos/legislação & jurisprudência , Conservação de Recursos Energéticos/métodos , Poluição Ambiental/prevenção & controle , Apoio Financeiro , Regulamentação Governamental , Modelos Econômicos , Sudeste dos Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA