Community intervention strategies to reduce the impact of financial strain and promote financial well-being: a comprehensive rapid review.

Financial well-being describes when people feel able to meet their financial obligations, feel financially secure and are able to make choices that benefit their quality of life. Financial strain occurs when people are unable to pay their bills, feel stressed about money and experience negative impacts on their quality of life and health. In the face of the global economic repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic, community-led approaches are required to address the setting-specific needs of residents and reduce the adverse impacts of widespread financial strain. To encourage evidence-informed best practices, a provincial health authority and community-engaged research centre collaborated to conduct a rapid review. We augmented the rapid review with an environmental scan and interviews. Our data focused on Western Canada and was collected prior to the pandemic (May-September 2019). We identified eight categories of community-led strategies to promote financial well-being: systems navigation and access; financial literacy and skills; emergency financial assistance; asset building; events and attractions; employment and educational support; transportation; and housing. We noted significant gaps in the evidence, including methodological limitations of the included studies (e.g. generalisability, small sample size), a lack of reporting on the mechanisms leading to the outcomes and evaluation of long-term impacts, sparse practice-based data on evaluation methods and outcomes, and limited intervention details in the published literature. Critically, few of the included interventions specifically targeted financial strain and/or well-being. We discuss the implications of these gaps in addition to possibilities and priorities for future research and practice. We also consider the results in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic consequences.

Incidence and risk factors for failed medical management of spinal epidural abscess: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE Spinal epidural abscess (SEA) is a life-threatening infection. It is uncertain whether medical versus surgical treatment is the ideal initial approach for neurologically intact patients with SEA. Recent evidence demonstrates that initial medical management is increasingly common; however, patients who ultimately require surgery after failed medical management may have a worse prognosis than those whose treatment was initially surgical. The primary objective of this study was to establish the current incidence of failed medical management for SEA. The secondary aim was to identify risk factors associated with the failure of medical management. METHODS The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis by searching electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PubMed), recent conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles. Studies that reported original data on consecutive adult patients with SEA treated medically were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, which included a total of 489 medically treated patients with SEA. Agreement on articles for study inclusion was very high between the reviewers (kappa 0.86). In a meta-analysis, the overall pooled risk of failed medical management was 29.3% (95% CI 21.4%-37.2%) and when medical to surgical crossover was used to define failure the rate was 26.3% (95% CI 13.0%-39.7%). Only 6 studies provided data for analysis by intended treatment, with a pooled estimate of 35.1% (95% CI 15.7%-54.4%) of failed medical management. Two studies reported predictors of the failure of medical management. CONCLUSIONS Although the incidence of failed medical management of SEA was relatively common in published reports, estimates were highly heterogeneous between studies, thus introducing uncertainty about the frequency of this risk. A consensus definition of failure is required to facilitate comparison of failure rates across studies.

The prognostic value of HPV status and p16 expression in patients with carcinoma of the anal canal.

BACKGROUND: In anal cancer studies, the detection frequency of high-risk HPV (human papillomavirus) is variable, depending on the method used. There are limited data reporting results of different HPV detection techniques in the same clinical series, and very few correlating results with clinical outcome. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate tumor expression of p16/HPV16 using three different methods, and to determine their association with clinical outcome in patients with anal canal squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). DESIGN: This retrospective study included patients with anal canal SCC treated with definitive radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy at a single institution between 1992 and 2005. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples from 53 of the 89 (60%) patient pre-treatment biopsies were adequate for tissue microarray construction. HPV status was determined using: p16 expression by conventional immunohistochemistry (IHC) and quantitative IHC (AQUA), HPV genotype analysis by chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) and HPV linear array sub-typing. Expression status was correlated with clinical outcome. RESULTS: 80% (28/35) of patient tumors had high p16 expression using conventional IHC. HPV16 CISH was positive in 81% (34/42) of tumors, and 78% (28/36) of tumors were HPV subtype 16. HPV16 CISH correlated with p16 evaluated by conventional IHC (correlation coefficient 0.46; p = 0.01) and by p16 AQUA score (correlation coefficient 0.49; p = 0.001). A subset of cases (15%) had very high p16 quantitative IHC scores (>244) and were associated with a higher incidence of local or distant recurrence (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority (80%) of anal canal SCC in our series were positive for HPV16/p16, regardless of the testing method used. The exploratory analysis of automated quantitative IHC scoring was the only technique to define a subset of patients with a worse prognosis by p16 expression status on univariate analysis. Further exploration of the molecular mechanisms of treatment resistance in association with very high p16 expression is warranted.