Roles, Barriers, and Recommendations for Community Health Workers Providing Community-Based HIV Care in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Review.

While the impact of Community Health Workers (CHWs) on home-based human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) care has been documented, barriers and recommendations have not been systematically reviewed. Following the reporting requirements of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we used an aggregative narrative synthesis approach to summarize the results of qualitative studies published between January 1, 2000, and November 6, 2020 in the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. In total, 17 studies met the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. They reported on a range of roles played by CHWs in HIV care, including education and health promotion; HIV-specific care (HIV testing services; screening for opportunistic infections and acute illness); medication delivery; tracing persons who had defaulted from care; and support (treatment support; referral; home-based care; and psychosocial support). Many different barriers to community-based HIV care were reported and centered on the following themes: Stigma and nondisclosure; inadequate support (lack of resources, inadequate training, inadequate funding, and inadequate monitoring); and health system challenges (patients' preference for more frequent visits and poor integration of CHWs in the wider health care system). Recommendations to mitigate these barriers included: addressing HIV-related stigma; introducing updated and relevant CHW training; strengthening the supervision of CHWs; coordinating care between the home and facilities; incorporating patient-centered mHealth approaches; and committing to the funding and resources needed for successful community-based care. In summary, CHWs are providing a variety of important community-based HIV services but face challenges with regards to training, resources, and supervision.

Trail running injury risk factors: a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review and frequently update the available evidence on injury risk factors and epidemiology of injury in trail running. DESIGN: Living systematic review. Updated searches will be done every 6 months for a minimum period of 5 years. DATA SOURCES: Eight electronic databases were searched from inception to 18 March 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies that investigated injury risk factors and/or reported the epidemiology of injury in trail running. RESULTS: Nineteen eligible studies were included, of which 10 studies investigated injury risk factors among 2 785 participants. Significant intrinsic factors associated with injury are: more running experience, level A runner and higher total propensity to sports accident questionnaire (PAD-22) score. Previous history of cramping and postrace biomarkers of muscle damage is associated with cramping. Younger age and low skin phototypes are associated with sunburn. Significant extrinsic factors associated with injury are neglecting warm-up, no specialised running plan, training on asphalt, double training sessions per day and physical labour occupations. A slower race finishing time is associated with cramping, while more than 3 hours of training per day, shade as the primary mode of sun protection and being single are associated with sunburn. An injury incidence range 0.7-61.2 injuries/1000 hours of running and prevalence range 1.3% to 90% were reported. The lower limb was the most reported region of injury, specifically involving blisters of the foot/toe. CONCLUSION: Limited studies investigated injury risk factors in trail running. Our review found eight intrinsic and nine extrinsic injury risk factors. This review highlighted areas for future research that may aid in designing injury risk management strategies for safer trail running participation.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021240832.

Epidemiology of Injury and Illness Among Trail Runners: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Trail running is characterised by large elevation gains/losses and uneven varying running surfaces. Limited information is available on injury and illness among trail runners to help guide injury and illness prevention strategies. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this review was to describe the epidemiology of injury and illness among trail runners. METHODS: Eight electronic databases were systematically searched (MEDLINE Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, SportsDiscus, CINAHL, Health Source: Nursing/Academic, Health Source: Consumer Ed., and Cochrane) from inception to November 2020. The search was conducted according to the PRISMA statement and the study was registered on PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42019135933). Full-text English and French studies that investigated injury and/or illness among trail runners participating in training/racing were included. The main outcome measurements included: trail running injury (incidence, prevalence, anatomical site, tissue type, pathology-type/specific diagnosis, severity), and illness (incidence, prevalence, symptoms, specific diagnosis, organ system, severity). The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using an adapted Downs and Black assessment tool. RESULTS: Sixteen studies with 8644 participants were included. Thirteen studies investigated race-related injury and/or illness and three studies included training-related injuries. The overall incidence range was 1.6-4285.0 injuries per 1000 h of running and 65.0-6676.6 illnesses per 1000 h of running. The foot was the most common anatomical site of trail running injury followed by the knee, lower leg, thigh, and ankle. Skin lacerations/abrasions were the most common injury diagnoses followed by skin blisters, muscle strains, muscle cramping, and ligament sprains. The most common trail running illnesses reported related to the gastro-intestinal tract (GIT), followed by the metabolic, and cardiovascular systems. Symptoms of nausea and vomiting related to GIT distress and dehydration were commonly reported. CONCLUSION: Current trail running literature consists mainly of injury and illness outcomes specifically in relation to single-day race participation events. Limited evidence is available on training-related injury and illness in trail running. Our review showed that injury and illness are common among trail runners, but certain studies included in this review only focused on dermatological injuries (e.g. large number of feet blisters) and GIT symptoms. Specific areas for future research were identified that could improve the management of trail running injury and illness.