A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of food safety education interventions for consumers in developed countries.

BACKGROUND: Foodborne illness has a large public health and economic burden worldwide, and many cases are associated with food handled and prepared at home. Educational interventions are necessary to improve consumer food safety practices and reduce the associated burden of foodborne illness. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and targeted meta-analyses to investigate the effectiveness of food safety education interventions for consumers. Relevant articles were identified through a preliminary scoping review that included: a comprehensive search in 10 bibliographic databases with verification; relevance screening of abstracts; and extraction of article characteristics. Experimental studies conducted in developed countries were prioritized for risk-of-bias assessment and data extraction. Meta-analysis was conducted on data subgroups stratified by key study design-intervention-population-outcome categories and subgroups were assessed for their quality of evidence. Meta-regression was conducted where appropriate to identify possible sources of between-trial heterogeneity. RESULTS: We identified 79 relevant studies: 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 12 non-randomized controlled trials (NRTs); and 50 uncontrolled before-and-after studies. Several studies did not provide sufficient details on key design features (e.g. blinding), with some high risk-of-bias ratings due to incomplete outcome data and selective reporting. We identified a moderate to high confidence in results from two large RCTs investigating community- and school-based educational training interventions on behaviour outcomes in children and youth (median standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.20, range: 0.05, 0.35); in two small RCTs evaluating video and written instructional messaging on behavioural intentions in adults (SMD = 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.02, 0.69); and in two NRT studies for university-based education on attitudes of students and staff (SMD = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.10, 0.43). Uncontrolled before-and-after study outcomes were very heterogeneous and we have little confidence that the meta-analysis results reflect the true effect. Some variation in outcomes was explained in meta-regression models, including a dose effect for behaviour outcomes in RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: In controlled trials, food safety education interventions showed significant effects in some contexts; however, many outcomes were very heterogeneous and do not provide a strong quality of evidence to support decision-making. Future research in this area is needed using more robust experimental designs to build on interventions shown to be effective in uncontrolled before-and-after studies.

Scoping Review of Research on the Effectiveness of Food-Safety Education Interventions Directed at Consumers.

Improper food handling by consumers at home is a major cause of foodborne illness. Therefore, effective education strategies are essential to change consumers' food safety attitudes and behaviors. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and characterize primary literature examining the effectiveness of consumer food-safety education interventions. Ten bibliographic databases were searched using a comprehensive search strategy. Citations were identified; two reviewers screened them for relevance and characterized relevant articles. To ensure results would be applicable to end users, stakeholders were engaged to provide input on the review scope, methods, and results. We identified 246 relevant articles, of which 150 were quantitative, 66 qualitative, and 30 mixed-method research studies. Most studies (64.2%) were published in the United States, using an uncontrolled before-and-after study design (31.3%), and investigated the effectiveness of community-based training sessions and workshops (52.0%). Research gaps were found in the number of randomized controlled studies conducted, academic- and school-based courses and curricula investigated, and interventions targeting high-risk populations (e.g., pregnant women, those who are immunocompromised) and using new media channels (e.g., social media). Key opportunities to enhance the utility of future primary research investigating consumer food-safety interventions include the following: using studies based on behavior-change theories and formative research; engaging the target population in the research; using validated instruments to measures outcomes; and reporting intervention characteristics and outcomes completely. Results of this review can be used to prioritize future primary research and decision-making in this area.

Interventions for Enhancing Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy (ART): A Systematic Review of High Quality Studies.

We sought to review the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) from studies included in a recent Cochrane review that reported a clinical and an adherence outcome, with at least 80% follow-up for 6 months or more. Data were extracted independently and in duplicate, with an adjudicator for disagreements. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Of 182 relevant studies in the Cochrane review, 49 were related to ART. Statistical pooling was not warranted due to heterogeneity in interventions, participants, treatments, adherence measures and outcomes. Many studies had high risk of bias in elements of design and outcome ascertainment. Only 10 studies improved both adherence and clinical outcomes. These used the following interventions: adherence counselling (two studies); a once-daily regimen (compared to twice daily); text messaging; web-based cognitive behavioral intervention; face-to-face multi-session intensive behavioral interventions (two studies); contingency management; modified directly observed therapy; and nurse-delivered home visits combined with telephone calls. Patient-related adherence interventions were the most frequently tested. Uniform adherence measures and higher quality studies of younger populations are encouraged.

Interventions for enhancing medication adherence.

BACKGROUND: People who are prescribed self administered medications typically take only about half their prescribed doses. Efforts to assist patients with adherence to medications might improve the benefits of prescribed medications. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review is to assess the effects of interventions intended to enhance patient adherence to prescribed medications for medical conditions, on both medication adherence and clinical outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We updated searches of The Cochrane Library, including CENTRAL (via http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cochranelibrary/search/), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO (all via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), and Sociological Abstracts (via ProQuest) on 11 January 2013 with no language restriction. We also reviewed bibliographies in articles on patient adherence, and contacted authors of relevant original and review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included unconfounded RCTs of interventions to improve adherence with prescribed medications, measuring both medication adherence and clinical outcome, with at least 80% follow-up of each group studied and, for long-term treatments, at least six months follow-up for studies with positive findings at earlier time points. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted all data and a third author resolved disagreements. The studies differed widely according to medical condition, patient population, intervention, measures of adherence, and clinical outcomes. Pooling results according to one of these characteristics still leaves highly heterogeneous groups, and we could not justify meta-analysis. Instead, we conducted a qualitative analysis with a focus on the RCTs with the lowest risk of bias for study design and the primary clinical outcome. MAIN RESULTS: The present update included 109 new RCTs published since the previous update in January 2007, bringing the total number of RCTs to 182; we found five RCTs from the previous update to be ineligible and excluded them. Studies were heterogeneous for patients, medical problems, treatment regimens, adherence interventions, and adherence and clinical outcome measurements, and most had high risk of bias. The main changes in comparison with the previous update include that we now: 1) report a lack of convincing evidence also specifically among the studies with the lowest risk of bias; 2) do not try to classify studies according to intervention type any more, due to the large heterogeneity; 3) make our database available for collaboration on sub-analyses, in acknowledgement of the need to make collective advancement in this difficult field of research. Of all 182 RCTs, 17 had the lowest risk of bias for study design features and their primary clinical outcome, 11 from the present update and six from the previous update. The RCTs at lowest risk of bias generally involved complex interventions with multiple components, trying to overcome barriers to adherence by means of tailored ongoing support from allied health professionals such as pharmacists, who often delivered intense education, counseling (including motivational interviewing or cognitive behavioral therapy by professionals) or daily treatment support (or both), and sometimes additional support from family or peers. Only five of these RCTs reported improvements in both adherence and clinical outcomes, and no common intervention characteristics were apparent. Even the most effective interventions did not lead to large improvements in adherence or clinical outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Across the body of evidence, effects were inconsistent from study to study, and only a minority of lowest risk of bias RCTs improved both adherence and clinical outcomes. Current methods of improving medication adherence for chronic health problems are mostly complex and not very effective, so that the full benefits of treatment cannot be realized. The research in this field needs advances, including improved design of feasible long-term interventions, objective adherence measures, and sufficient study power to detect improvements in patient-important clinical outcomes. By making our comprehensive database available for sharing we hope to contribute to achieving these advances.

Adherence measurement and patient recruitment methods are poor in intervention trials to improve patient adherence.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a scale and survey the measurement of patient adherence and patient recruitment, and to explore how these methods impact the results in randomized controlled trials of interventions to improve patient adherence to medications. STUDY DESIGN: Analytic survey of a purposively selected sample of patient adherence intervention trials from a systematic review, assessing the quality of adherence measurement and patient recruitment methods. RESULTS: We identified 44 different measures of adherence, with qualities ranging from valid and objective to unreliable and subjective. The median overall quality of measures of adherence was 5 (interquartile range [IQR], 3; range, 0-9, 9 is high quality). The quality of the measures was associated with variation in the estimate of adherence (Spearman r = 0.66; 95% confidence interval: 0.39, 0.83). The median overall quality of patient recruitment methods was 2 (IQR, 1; maximum score 6, higher is better). There was no significant correlation between the power of the trial to detect an effect and the quality of the patient recruitment methods. CONCLUSION: Measurement and recruitment methods in adherence trials varied considerably, and most methods were of low quality. Adherence research could be advanced by using higher quality measures of adherence and better selection and baseline assessment of study participants.