ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Many risk factors impact the health of hospital night workers, which can lead to physical and mental health disorders. During the recent period, night hospital workers have been particularly stressed. This study therefore aims to: (i) To document the prevalence of depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, and symptoms suggestive of post-traumatic stress disorder in night shift workers (NSHW) working in Parisian public hospitals after France's first COVID-19 wave ended; (ii) To estimate the effect of negative representations and perceptions of night shift work on these mental health outcomes. METHODS: An observational cross-sectional online survey of NSHW (June to September 2020) in 39 public hospitals in Paris, France. Standard scales were used to measure mental health outcomes. Weighted multinomial logistic regression models supported the identification of predictors of depression (score > 10 on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS, for depression), anxiety (score > 10 on the HADS for anxiety), severe insomnia (score > 21 on the Insomnia Severity Index, ISI) and symptoms suggestive of post-traumatic stress disorder (score > 36 on the Impact of Event Scale-Revised, IES-R). RESULTS: The weighted prevalence rates [95% confidence interval] of depression, anxiety, severe insomnia, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder were, respectively, 18.9% [16.5-21.2], 7.6% [6.0-9.1], 8.6% [6.9-10.2] and 11.7% [9.7-13.6]. After multiple adjustment, organizational changes in NSHW professional lives due to the COVID-19 pandemic (such as moving to another hospital department and modified schedules) and NSHW-perceived negative representations of night work were significantly associated with all studied mental health outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the importance of monitoring mental health and sleep quality among NSHW in Parisian public hospitals, even more during health crises. Multilevel interventions aiming at reducing negative representations and improving work organization are urgently needed to improve overall health of this frontline healthcare providers group.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Shift Work Schedule , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Mental Health , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders/epidemiology , Pandemics , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Anxiety/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The widespread under-screening and under-treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD) contributes to its health and socioeconomic burden. We conducted a mixed-methods (qualitative and qualitative) study in people with alcohol use disorder (PWAUD) to explore their expectations, as well as barriers and levers to AUD care. METHODS: Individuals with AUDIT > 15 (N = 179) were interviewed using computer-assisted interviews in several medical and non-medical sites (e.g., bars) (quantitative substudy). We also conducted semi-structured face-to-face interviews with 36 PWAUD (qualitative substudy). Using logistic regression, we explored factors associated with having previously received/sought care for AUD. Three major themes were identified in the qualitative textual analysis using a descending hierarchical classification. RESULTS: Not socializing with heavy drinkers (AOR [95%CI]:3.84[1.66-8.85]), regular smoking (9.72[3.91-24.15]) and feeling discriminated against (2.35[1.10-5.05]) were independent levers to having sought/received care for AUD, while being aged < 50 and employment were independent barriers. The five predominant themes in PWAUD discourses emerging from the textual analysis were: drinking context, medical care, alcohol treatment, tobacco/addiction and family. When triangulating results from the logistic regression and the textual analysis, two barriers (social drinking and difficulties with the medical care system), and two levers (family influence and tobacco addiction), emerged. CONCLUSION: These results underline the need for interventions targeting families and the social network to increase awareness about AUD and related care. Simplified and novel comprehensive care trajectories are urgently needed to reduce the clinical and public health burden of AUD.
Subject(s)
Alcoholism/prevention & control , Mass Screening , Adult , Alcoholism/epidemiology , Female , France/epidemiology , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/psychology , Middle Aged , Motivation , Qualitative Research , Socioeconomic Factors , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Background: People living with hepatitis C infection (HCV) have a significant impact on the global healthcare system, with high rates of inpatient service use. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have the potential to alleviate this burden; however, the evidence on the impact of HCV infection and hospital outcomes is undetermined. This systematic review aims to assess this research gap, including how DAAs may modify the relationship between HCV infection and hospital-related outcomes. Methods: We searched five databases up to August 2022 to identify relevant studies evaluating the impact of HCV infection on hospital-related outcomes. We created an electronic database of potentially eligible articles, removed duplicates, and then independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. Results: A total of 57 studies were included. Analysis of the included studies found an association between HCV infection and increased number of hospitalizations, length of stay, and readmissions. There was less consistent evidence of a relationship between HCV and in-hospital mortality. Only four studies examined the impact of DAAs, which showed that DAAs were associated with a reduction in hospitalizations and mortality. In the 14 studies available among people living with HIV, HCV coinfection similarly increased hospitalization, but there was less evidence for the other hospital-related outcomes. Conclusions: There is good to high-quality evidence that HCV negatively impacts hospital-related outcomes, primarily through increased hospitalizations, length of stay, and readmissions. Given the paucity of studies on the effect of DAAs on hospital outcomes, future research is needed to understand their impact on hospital-related outcomes.
Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents , Hepatitis C , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Length of Stay , Humans , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hepatitis C/epidemiology , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/complications , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Coinfection/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Some African countries are still reluctant to introduce the hepatitis B vaccine birth dose (HepB-BD) into their expanded program of immunization (EPI), partly because of logistical, economic, and cost information constraints. To assist decision-makers in these countries, we assessed the economic and financial costs of HepB-BD introduction in Senegal in 2016. We performed a micro-costing study in a representative sample of Senegal's EPI sites at all levels in 2018. Information on EPI and HepB-BD activity-related inputs and costs was collected using standardized questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Using inverse probability weighting, we computed weighted average costs associated with HepB-BD introduction for each EPI level, country-level aggregated costs and estimated costs per newborn. Economic and financial costs from a government perspective were estimated in US dollars for 2015, 2016 and 2017. Total economic costs were USD 143,364 in 2015, USD 759,406 in 2016 and USD 867,311 in 2017, while financial costs were USD 127,745, USD 82,519 and USD 29,853, respectively. When annualizing pre-introduction and initial training costs, the economic (financial) cost per vaccinated newborn was USD 2.10 (USD 0.30) in 2016 and USD 1.90 (USD 0.20) in 2017. Our estimates provide valuable information to implement HepB-BD in Sub-Saharan African countries that have not yet integrated this vaccine.
ABSTRACT
Background: Cannabidiol (CBD) is a natural component of cannabis that possesses a widespread and complex immunomodulatory, antioxidant, anxiolytic, and antiepileptic properties. Much experimental data suggest that CBD could be used for various purposes in alcohol use disorder (AUD) and alcohol-related damage on the brain and the liver. Aim: To provide a rationale for using CBD to treat human subjects with AUD, based on the findings of experimental studies. Methods: Narrative review of studies pertaining to the assessment of CBD efficiency on drinking reduction, or on the improvement of any aspect of alcohol-related toxicity in AUD. Results: Experimental studies find that CBD reduces the overall level of alcohol drinking in animal models of AUD by reducing ethanol intake, motivation for ethanol, relapse, anxiety, and impulsivity. Moreover, CBD reduces alcohol-related steatosis and fibrosis in the liver by reducing lipid accumulation, stimulating autophagy, modulating inflammation, reducing oxidative stress, and by inducing death of activated hepatic stellate cells. Finally, CBD reduces alcohol-related brain damage, preventing neuronal loss by its antioxidant and immunomodulatory properties. Conclusions: CBD could directly reduce alcohol drinking in subjects with AUD. Any other applications warrant human trials in this population. By reducing alcohol-related steatosis processes in the liver, and alcohol-related brain damage, CBD could improve both hepatic and neurocognitive outcomes in subjects with AUD, regardless of the individual's drinking trajectory. This might pave the way for testing new harm reduction approaches in AUD, in order to protect the organs of subjects with an ongoing AUD.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: People living with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are disproportionately over-represented in the healthcare system due to various individual and contextual circumstances, including comorbidities and socioeconomic marginalisation. With growing trends in morbidity and mortality related to HCV infection, HCV is becoming a significant health and financial burden on the healthcare system, particularly in acute hospital settings. It is noteworthy that with the advent of direct-acting antiviral therapy the increasing number of patients who are cured of HCV could potentially result in different patterns of hospital-related outcomes over time. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of published literature to retrieve quantitative research articles pertaining to hospital outcomes among patients living with HCV. Primary outcomes include hospitalisation rates, length of stay, leaving against medical advice, readmission and in-hospital mortality. In total, five databases will be searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science). Titles, abstracts and full texts will be independently reviewed by two investigators in three separate stages. The methodological quality of included quantitative research studies will be assessed using a validated tool. Data from included articles will be extracted using a standardised form and synthesised in a narrative account. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Results of this systematic review could provide a better understanding on how to optimise health systems and services to improve patient outcomes and care. The results of this study may provide future research with a foundation to guide decision-making and for designing and implementing systems-level interventions to improve treatment and care delivery for people living with HCV. Ethical approval for this study was received by the University of British Columbia/Providence Health Care Research Ethics Board. Findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, presentations, reports and community forums PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017081082; Pre-results.
Subject(s)
Hepatitis C, Chronic/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Cost of Illness , Hepatitis C, Chronic/mortality , Humans , Research Design , Risk Factors , Systematic Reviews as TopicABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Methadone coverage is poor in many countries due in part to methadone induction being possible only in specialized care (SC). This multicenter pragmatic trial compared the effectiveness of methadone treatment between two induction models: primary care (PC) and SC. METHODS: In this study, registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov (NCT00657397), opioid-dependent individuals not on methadone treatment for at least one month or receiving buprenorphine but needing to switch were randomly assigned to start methadone in PC (N = 155) or in SC (N = 66) in 10 sites in France. Visits were scheduled at months M0, M3, M6 and M12. The primary outcome was self-reported abstinence from street-opioids at 12 months (M12) (with an underlying 15% non-inferiority hypothesis for PC). Secondary outcomes were abstinence during follow-up, engagement in treatment (i.e. completing the induction period), retention and satisfaction with the explanations provided by the physician. Primary analysis used intention to treat (ITT). Mixed models and the log-rank test were used to assess the arm effect (PC vs. SC) on the course of abstinence and retention, respectively. RESULTS: In the ITT analysis (n = 155 in PC, 66 in SC), which compared the proportions of street-opioid abstinent participants, 85/155 (55%) and 22/66 (33%) of the participants were classified as street-opioid abstinent at M12 in PC and SC, respectively. This ITT analysis showed the non-inferiority of PC (21.5 [7.7; 35.3]). Engagement in treatment and satisfaction with the explanations provided by the physician were significantly higher in PC than SC. Retention in methadone and abstinence during follow-up were comparable in both arms (p = 0.47, p = 0.39, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Under appropriate conditions, methadone induction in primary care is feasible and acceptable to both physicians and patients. It is as effective as induction in specialized care in reducing street-opioid use and ensuring engagement and retention in treatment for opioid dependence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Number Eudract 2008-001338-28; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00657397; International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Register ISRCTN31125511.