Research outcomes informing the selection of public health interventions and strategies to implement them: A cross-sectional survey of Australian policy-maker and practitioner preferences.

BACKGROUND: A key role of public health policy-makers and practitioners is to ensure beneficial interventions are implemented effectively enough to yield improvements in public health. The use of evidence to guide public health decision-making to achieve this is recommended. However, few studies have examined the relative value, as reported by policy-makers and practitioners, of different broad research outcomes (that is, measures of cost, acceptability, and effectiveness). To guide the conduct of research and better inform public health policy and practice, this study aimed at describing the research outcomes that Australian policy-makers and practitioners consider important for their decision-making when selecting: (a) public health interventions; (b) strategies to support their implementation; and (c) to assess the differences in research outcome preferences between policy-makers and practitioners. METHOD: An online value-weighting survey was conducted with Australian public health policy-makers and practitioners working in the field of non-communicable disease prevention. Participants were presented with a list of research outcomes and were asked to select up to five they considered most critical to their decision-making. They then allocated 100 points across these - allocating more points to outcomes perceived as more important. Outcome lists were derived from a review and consolidation of evaluation and outcome frameworks in the fields of public health knowledge translation and implementation. We used descriptive statistics to report relative preferences overall and for policy-makers and practitioners separately. RESULTS: Of the 186 participants; 90 primarily identified as policy-makers and 96 as public health prevention practitioners. Overall, research outcomes of effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and sustainability were identified as the four most important outcomes when considering either interventions or strategies to implement them. Scores were similar for most outcomes between policy-makers and practitioners. CONCLUSION: For Australian policy-makers and practitioners working in the field of non-communicable disease prevention, outcomes related to effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and sustainability appear particularly important to their decisions about the interventions they select and the strategies they employ to implement them. The findings suggest researchers should seek to meet these information needs and prioritize the inclusion of such outcomes in their research and dissemination activities. The extent to which these outcomes are critical to informing the decision of policy-makers and practitioners working in other jurisdictions or contexts warrants further investigation.

Disseminating health research to public health policy-makers and practitioners: a survey of source, message content and delivery modality preferences.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the views of policy-makers and practitioners regarding how best to communicate research evidence is important to support research use in their decision-making. AIM: To quantify and describe public health policy-makers and practitioners' views regarding the source, content and form of messages describing public health research findings to inform their decision-making. We also sought to examine differences in preferences between public health policy-makers and practitioners. METHODS: A cross sectional, value-weighting survey of policy-makers and practitioners was conducted. Participants were asked to allocate a proportion of 100 points across different (i) sources of research evidence, (ii) message content and (iii) the form in which evidence is presented. Points were allocated based on their rating of influence, usefulness and preference when making decisions about health policy or practice. RESULTS: A total of 186 survey responses were received from 90 policy-makers and 96 practitioners. Researchers and government department agencies were the most influential source of research evidence based on mean allocation of points, followed by knowledge brokers, professional peers and associations. Mean point allocation for perceived usefulness of message content was highest for simple summary of key findings and implications, and then evidence-based recommendations and data and statistical summaries. Finally, based on mean scores, policy-makers and practitioners preferred to receive research evidence in the form of peer-reviewed publications, reports, evidence briefs and plain language summaries. There were few differences in scores between policy-makers and practitioners across source, message content or form assessments or those with experience in different behavioural areas. CONCLUSIONS: The findings should provide a basis for the future development and optimization of dissemination strategies to this important stakeholder group.

Enhancing healthcare at home for older people in rural and regional Australia: A protocol for co-creation to design and implement system change.

BACKGROUND: World-wide, health service providers are moving towards innovative models of clinical home-based care services as a key strategy to improve equity of access and quality of care. To optimise existing and new clinical home-based care programs, evidence informed approaches are needed that consider the complexity of the health care system across different contexts. METHODS: We present a protocol for working with health services and their partners to perform rapid identification, prioritisation, and co-design of content-appropriate strategies to optimise the delivery of healthcare at home for older people in rural and regional areas. The protocol combines Systems Thinking and Implementation Science using a Consensus Mapping and Co-design (CMC) process delivered over five workshops. DISCUSSION: The protocol will be implemented with rural and regional healthcare providers to identify digital and non-digital solutions that have the potential to inform models of service delivery, improve patient experience, and optimise health outcomes. The combination of system and implementation science is a unique approach for optimising healthcare at home for older populations, especially in the rural context where need is high. This is the first protocol to integrate the use of systems and implementation science into one process and articulating these methods will help with replicating this in future practice. Results of the design phase will translate into practice through standard health service planning methods to enhance implementation and sustainability. The delivery of the protocol will include building capacity of health service workers to embed the design, implementation, and evaluation approach into normal practice. This protocol forms part of the DELIVER (Delivering Enhanced heaLthcare at home through optImising Virtual tools for oldEr people in Rural and regional Australia) Project. Funded by Australia's Medical Research Future Fund, DELIVER involves a collaboration with public health services of Western Victoria, Australia.

Strengthening local government policies to address health inequities: perspectives from Australian local government stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: With their close connection to community and increasing preventive health remit, local governments are well positioned to implement policies and programs to address health inequities. Nevertheless, there is a lack of evidence of equity-focused policy action in this sector. We aimed to understand how local government representatives approach equity in the development and implementation of health and wellbeing policies and programs, and to identify potential enablers for strengthening an equity focus. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews (June 2022-January 2023) with 29 health directorate representatives from 21 local governments in Victoria, Australia. Representatives were recruited from urban, regional and rural local government areas, with varying levels of socioeconomic position. Data was analysed inductively using Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis, informed by social determinants of health theory and a public policy decision making framework. RESULTS: Local governments approach health equity in different ways including focusing on priority populations, disadvantaged geographic areas, or by targeting the upstream determinants of health, such as housing and employment. Enabling factors for more equity-oriented local government policy action included those internal to local governments: (i) having a clear conceptualisation of equity, (ii) fostering a strong equity-centric culture, and (iii) developing organisational-wide competency in health equity. External factors related to key stakeholder groups that support and/or influence local governments included: (iv) strong support from community, (v) state government leadership and legislation, and (vi) supportive local partners, networks and NGO's. CONCLUSIONS: Local governments have a responsibility to implement policies and programs that improve health and reduce health inequities. Local government's capacity to leverage resources, structures, processes and relationships, internally and across sectors and community, will be key to strengthening equity-oriented local government health policies and programs.

"He who pays the piper calls the tune": Researcher experiences of funder suppression of health behaviour intervention trial findings.

BACKGROUND: Governments commonly fund research with specific applications in mind. Such mechanisms may facilitate 'research translation' but funders may employ strategies that can also undermine the integrity of both science and government. We estimated the prevalence and investigated correlates of funder efforts to suppress health behaviour intervention trial findings. METHODS: Our sampling frame was lead or corresponding authors of papers (published 2007-2017) included in a Cochrane review, reporting findings from trials of interventions to improve nutrition, physical activity, sexual health, smoking, and substance use. Suppression events were based on a previous survey of public health academics. Participants answered questions concerning seven suppression events in their efforts to report the trial, e.g., [I was…] "asked to suppress certain findings as they were viewed as being unfavourable." We also examined the association between information on study funder, geographical location, targeted health behaviour, country democracy rating and age of publication with reported suppression. FINDINGS: We received responses from 104 authors (50%) of 208 eligible trials, from North America (34%), Europe (33%), Oceania (17%), and other countries (16%). Eighteen percent reported at least one of the seven suppression events relating to the trial in question. The most commonly reported suppression event was funder(s) expressing reluctance to publish because they considered the results 'unfavourable' (9% reported). We found no strong associations with the subject of research, funding source, democracy, region, or year of publication. CONCLUSIONS: One in five researchers in this global sample reported being pressured to delay, alter, or not publish the findings of health behaviour intervention trials. Regulation of funder and university practices, establishing study registries, and compulsory disclosure of funding conditions in scientific journals, are needed to protect the integrity of public-good research.

5-Year Follow-Up of a Telephone Intervention to Increase Fruit and Vegetable Consumption in Preschoolers: The 'Healthy Habits' Cluster Randomised Trial.

Little is known about the long-term impact of telephone-based interventions to improve child diet. This trial aimed to assess the long-term effectiveness (after 5 years) of a telephone-based parent intervention in increasing children's fruit and vegetable consumption. Parents of 3-5 year olds were recruited from 30 Australian preschools to participate in a cluster randomised controlled trial. Intervention parents received four, weekly, 30-min support calls aimed at modifying the home food environment. Control parents received printed materials. Consumption was assessed using the Fruit and Vegetable subscale of the Children's Dietary Questionnaire (F&V-CDQ) (children) and daily servings of fruit and vegetables (children and parents) via parent telephone interview. Of the 394 parents who completed baseline, 57% (99 intervention, 127 control) completed follow-up. After 5-years, higher intervention F&V-CDQ scores, bordering on significance, were found in complete-case (+1.1, p = 0.06) and sensitivity analyses (+1.1, p = 0.06). There was no difference in parent or child consumption of daily fruit servings. Complete-case analysis indicated significantly higher consumption of child vegetable servings (+0.5 servings; p = 0.02), which was not significant in sensitivity analysis (+0.5 servings; p = 0.10). This telephone-based parent intervention targeting the family food environment may yield promising improvements in child fruit and vegetable consumption over a 5-year period.

Protocol for an effectiveness- implementation hybrid trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an m-health intervention to decrease the consumption of discretionary foods packed in school lunchboxes: the 'SWAP IT' trial.

BACKGROUND: At a population level, small reductions in energy intake have the potential to contribute to a reduction in the prevalence of childhood obesity. In many school systems, there is the potential to achieve a reduction in energy intake through modest improvements in foods packed in children's school lunchboxes. This study will assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a multi-component intervention that uses an existing school-based communication application to reduce the kilojoule content from discretionary foods and drinks consumed by children from school lunchboxes whilst at school. METHODS: A Type I hybrid effectiveness-implementation cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted in up to 36 primary schools in the Hunter New England, Central Coast and Mid North Coast regions of New South Wales, Australia. Designed using the Behaviour Change Wheel, schools will be randomly allocated to receive either a 5-month (1.5 school terms) multi-component intervention that includes: 1) school lunchbox nutrition guidelines; 2) curriculum lessons; 3) information pushed to parents via an existing school-based communication application and 4) additional parent resources to address common barriers to packing healthy lunchboxes or a control arm (standard school practices). The study will assess both child level dietary outcomes and school-level implementation outcomes. The primary trial outcome, mean energy (kJ) content of discretionary lunchbox foods packed in children's lunchboxes, will be assessed at baseline and immediately post intervention (5 months or 1.5 school terms). Analyses will be performed using intention to treat principles, assessing differences between groups via hierarchical linear regression models. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first fully powered randomised controlled trial internationally to examine the impact of an m-health intervention to reduce the mean energy from discretionary food and drinks packed in the school lunchbox. The intervention has been designed with scalability in mind and will address an important evidence gap which, if shown to be effective, has the potential to be applied at a population level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN:12618001731280 registered on 17/10/2018. Protocol Version 1.

Two-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial to assess the sustainability of a school intervention to improve the implementation of a school-based nutrition policy.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: School-based nutrition policies can have a positive effect on the school food environment. The primary aim of this study was to assess the primary school adherence to a mandatory state-wide healthy canteen policy 12 months after an effective multi-strategic implementation intervention concluded. METHODS: Primary schools were randomised to (a) a 12-14 months multi-strategic intervention or (b) no-intervention (control). The intervention aimed to improve implementation of a state-wide canteen policy by encouraging schools to remove unhealthy food and beverages (classified as ''red'' or ''banned'') from canteen menus and replace with healthy items (classified as ''green''). No implementation support was provided to either group by the research team between the 12 and 24 months data collection period. RESULTS: Seventy schools participated, of which 56 schools were assessed at 24-month follow-up. Intervention schools were less likely to have a menu which contained ''red/banned'' items at 24-month follow-up (RR = 2.28; 95% CI: 1.18-4.40; P = 0.01). Intervention schools, however, were not more likely than controls to have a menu which contained >50% ''green'' items at 24-month follow-up (RR = 1.29; 95% CI: 0.98-1.70; P = 0.10). Intervention schools were more likely to adhere to both policy components (no red/banned items and >50% green items on the menu) than control schools (RR = 2.61; 95% CI: 1.29-5.29; P = 0.006). Among intervention schools that were fully adherent to the policy following implementation support (12-month post baseline), all were also adherent at the 24-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The intervention was effective in achieving long-term school adherence to a state-wide canteen policy at 24-month follow-up. SO WHAT?: The findings suggest that sustained improvements in implementation of school nutrition policies is possible following a period (12 months) of comprehensive implementation support.

Prevalence of night sleep duration, sleep quality and sleep hygiene practices among children attending childcare services in New South Wales, Australia.

AIM: To describe parent-reported child: (i) sleep duration; (ii) sleep quality; (iii) sleep hygiene practices; and (iv) the proportion of children meeting sleep duration recommendations. METHODS: A convenience sample of parents of Australian pre-school-aged children (3-5 years) were surveyed from the Hunter New England region of New South Wales. The cross-sectional survey was conducted via computer-assisted telephone interview. The survey assessed parent and child demographic characteristics and parent-reported child sleep duration, quality and sleep hygiene practices. RESULTS: A total of 488 eligible parents or guardians took part in the study. Parents reported that children slept an average of 11.03 h per night. Approximately 96% of children met daily sleep duration recommendations from sleep guidelines for their age group. The majority of parents reported that their child had 'good' sleep quality (86.89%). Almost 40% reported that their child woke at least once a night. Sleep hygiene practices were relatively well established; however, a small proportion of parents indicated that they had no rules surrounding bedtime (13.52%) or television use before bed (14.52%). CONCLUSIONS: The current study describes the sleep duration, quality and sleep hygiene practices of a sample of pre-school-aged children in New South Wales, Australia. Future research using objective measures of sleep duration and hygiene, as well as assessing a broader spectrum of sleep hygiene practices, is needed.

Association of parental investment of time and cost in food provisioning with adherence to dietary guidelines for the consumption of fruits, vegetables and non-core foods in pre-schoolers.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether parent-reported time and cost for provision of food is associated with consumption of fruits, vegetables and non-core foods in pre-schoolers. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the Healthy Habits randomised controlled trial. Two subscales of the Children's Dietary Questionnaire (CDQ) were used to assess fruit and vegetable, and non-core food consumption. SETTING: Thirty pre-schools in the Hunter Region of New South Wales, Australia. SUBJECTS: Parents (n 396) with a child aged 3-5 years attending a participating pre-school were recruited. Parents needed to reside with that child for at least four days per week and have primary responsibility for providing meals and snacks to their child. RESULTS: Sixty-three per cent of children had a parent-reported subscale score indicating adherence to dietary guidelines for fruit and vegetable intake, while 64% of children had a subscale score indicating they were exceeding dietary guidelines for non-core foods. Regression models revealed significant positive associations between higher CDQ scores for non-core foods (indicating higher consumption levels) and minutes that parents spent preparing food (P=0·032 and 0·025) and amount spent on purchasing food (P=0·043 and 0·020). The magnitude of the effects was small (estimate=0·003 and 0·001). CONCLUSIONS: Time and cost spent by parents on provision of food was not significantly associated with child fruit and vegetable consumption. Further explorations into time spent on food preparation and cost of food procurement are warranted to help address the increased consumption of non-core foods by pre-school children.

Patient-reported areas for quality improvement in general practice: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: GPs are often a patient's first point of contact with the health system. The increasing demands imposed on GPs may have an impact on the quality of care delivered. Patients are well placed to make judgements about aspects of care that need to be improved. AIM: To determine whether general practice patients perceive that the care they receive is 'patient-centred' across eight domains of care, and to determine the association between sociodemographic, GP and practice characteristics, detection of preventive health risks, and receipt of patient-centred care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional survey of patients attending Australian general practice clinics. METHOD: Patients completed a touchscreen survey in the waiting room to rate the care received from their GP across eight domains of patient-centred care. Patients also completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and self-reported health risk factors. GPs completed a checklist for each patient asking about the presence of health risk factors. RESULTS: In total 1486 patients and 51 GPs participated. Overall, 83% of patients perceived that the care they received was patient-centred across all eight domains. Patients most frequently perceived the 'access to health care when needed' domain as requiring improvement (8.3%). Not having private health insurance and attending a practice located in a disadvantaged area were significantly associated with perceived need for improvements in care (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients in general practice report that accessibility is an aspect of care that could be improved. Further investigation of how indicators of lower socioeconomic status interact with the provision of patient-centred care and health outcomes is required.