Interventions to improve health and the determinants of health among sex workers in high-income countries: a systematic review.

Many sex worker populations face high morbidity and mortality, but data are scarce on interventions to improve their health. We did a systematic review of health and social interventions to improve the health and wider determinants of health among adult sex workers in high-income countries. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EthOS, OpenGrey, and Social Care Online, as well as the Global Network of Sex Work Projects and the Sex Work Research Hub for studies published between Jan 1, 2005 and Dec 16, 2021 (PROSPERO CRD42019158674). Quantitative studies reporting disaggregated data for sex workers were included and no comparators were specified. We assessed rigour using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. We summarised studies using vote counting and a narrative synthesis. 20 studies were included. Most reported findings exclusively for female sex workers (n=17) and street-based sex workers (n=11). Intervention components were divided into education and empowerment (n=14), drug treatment (n=4), sexual and reproductive health care (n=7), other health care (n=5), and welfare (n=5). Interventions affected a range of mental health, physical health, and health behaviour outcomes. Multicomponent interventions and interventions that were focused on education and empowerment were of benefit. Interventions that used peer design and peer delivery were effective. An outreach or drop-in component might be beneficial in some contexts. Sex workers who were new to working in an area faced greater challenges accessing services. Data were scarce for male, transgender, and indoor-based sex workers. Co-designed and co-delivered interventions that are either multicomponent or focus on education and empowerment are likely to be effective. Policy makers and health-care providers should improve access to services for all genders of sex workers and those new to an area. Future research should develop interventions for a greater diversity of sex worker populations and for wider health and social needs.

Hospital-based preventative interventions for people experiencing homelessness in high-income countries: A systematic review.

Background: People experiencing homelessness have significant unmet needs and high rates of unplanned care. We aimed to describe preventative interventions, defined in their broadest sense, for people experiencing homelessness in a hospital context. Secondary aims included mapping outcomes and assessing intervention effectiveness. Methods: We searched online databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) from 1999-2019 and conducted backward and forward citation searches to 31 December 2020 (PROSPERO CRD42019154036). We included quantitative studies in emergency and inpatient settings measuring health or social outcomes for adults experiencing homelessness in high income countries. We assessed rigour using the "Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies" and summarised findings using descriptive quantitative methods, a binomial test, a Harvest Plot, and narrative synthesis. We used PRISMA and SWiM reporting guidelines. Findings: Twenty-eight studies identified eight intervention types: care coordination (n=18); advocacy, support, and outreach (n=13); social welfare assistance (n=13); discharge planning (n=12); homelessness identification (n=6); psychological therapy and treatment (n=6); infectious disease prevention (n=5); and screening, treatment, and referrals (n=5). The evidence strength was weak (n=16) to moderate (n=10), with two high quality randomised controlled trials. We identified six outcome categories with potential benefits observed for psychosocial outcomes, including housing (11/13 studies, 95%CI=54.6-98.1%, p=0.023), healthcare use (14/17, 56.6-96.2%, p=0.013), and healthcare costs (8/8, 63.1-100%, p=0.008). Benefits were less likely for health outcomes (4/5, 28.3-99.5%, p=0.375), integration with onward care (2/4, 6.8-93.2%, p=1.000), and feasibility/acceptability (5/6, 35.9-99.6%, p=0.219), but confidence intervals were very wide. We observed no harms. Most studies showing potential benefits were multi-component interventions. Interpretation: Hospital-based preventative interventions for people experiencing homelessness are potentially beneficial, but more rigorous research is needed. In the context of high needs and extreme inequities, policymakers and healthcare providers may consider implementing multi-component preventative interventions. Funding: SL is supported by an NIHR Clinical Doctoral Research Fellowship (ICA-CDRF-2016-02-042). JD is supported by an NIHR School of Public Health Research Pre-doctoral Fellowship (NU-004252). RWA is supported by a Wellcome Clinical Research Career Development Fellowship (206602).

Cardiovascular disease in homeless versus housed individuals: a systematic review of observational and interventional studies.

OBJECTIVES: To identify: (i) risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in homeless versus housed individuals and (ii) interventions for CVD in homeless populations. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review in EMBASE until December 2018 using a search strategy for observational and interventional studies without restriction regarding languages or countries. Meta-analyses were conducted, where appropriate and possible. Outcome measures were all-cause and CVD mortality, and morbidity. RESULTS: Our search identified 17 articles (6 case-control, 11 cohort) concerning risk of CVD and none regarding specific interventions. Nine were included to perform a meta-analysis. The majority (13/17, 76.4%) were high quality and all were based in Europe or North America, including 765 459 individuals, of whom 32 721 were homeless. 12/17 studies were pre-2011. Homeless individuals were more likely to have CVD than non-homeless individuals (pooled OR 2.96; 95% CI 2.80 to 3.13; p<0.0001; heterogeneity p<0.0001; I2=99.1%) and had increased CVD mortality (age-standardised mortality ratio range: 2.6-6.4). Compared with non-homeless individuals, hypertension was more likely in homeless people (pooled OR 1.38-1.75, p=0.0070; heterogeneity p=0.935; I2=0.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Homeless people have an approximately three times greater risk of CVD and an increased CVD mortality. However, there are no studies of specific pathways/interventions for CVD in this population. Future research should consider design and evaluation of tailored interventions or integrating CVD into existing interventions.

Morbidity and mortality in homeless individuals, prisoners, sex workers, and individuals with substance use disorders in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inclusion health focuses on people in extremely poor health due to poverty, marginalisation, and multimorbidity. We aimed to review morbidity and mortality data on four overlapping populations who experience considerable social exclusion: homeless populations, individuals with substance use disorders, sex workers, and imprisoned individuals. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published between Jan 1, 2005, and Oct 1, 2015. We included only systematic reviews, meta-analyses, interventional studies, and observational studies that had morbidity and mortality outcomes, were published in English, from high-income countries, and were done in populations with a history of homelessness, imprisonment, sex work, or substance use disorder (excluding cannabis and alcohol use). Studies with only perinatal outcomes and studies of individuals with a specific health condition or those recruited from intensive care or high dependency hospital units were excluded. We screened studies using systematic review software and extracted data from published reports. Primary outcomes were measures of morbidity (prevalence or incidence) and mortality (standardised mortality ratios [SMRs] and mortality rates). Summary estimates were calculated using a random effects model. FINDINGS: Our search identified 7946 articles, of which 337 studies were included for analysis. All-cause standardised mortality ratios were significantly increased in 91 (99%) of 92 extracted datapoints and were 11·86 (95% CI 10·42-13·30; I2=94·1%) in female individuals and 7·88 (7·03-8·74; I2=99·1%) in men. Summary SMR estimates for the International Classification of Diseases disease categories with two or more included datapoints were highest for deaths due to injury, poisoning, and other external causes, in both men (7·89; 95% CI 6·40-9·37; I2=98·1%) and women (18·72; 13·73-23·71; I2=91·5%). Disease prevalence was consistently raised across the following categories: infections (eg, highest reported was 90% for hepatitis C, 67 [65%] of 103 individuals for hepatitis B, and 133 [51%] of 263 individuals for latent tuberculosis infection), mental health (eg, highest reported was 9 [4%] of 227 individuals for schizophrenia), cardiovascular conditions (eg, highest reported was 32 [13%] of 247 individuals for coronary heart disease), and respiratory conditions (eg, highest reported was 9 [26%] of 35 individuals for asthma). INTERPRETATION: Our study shows that homeless populations, individuals with substance use disorders, sex workers, and imprisoned individuals experience extreme health inequities across a wide range of health conditions, with the relative effect of exclusion being greater in female individuals than male individuals. The high heterogeneity between studies should be explored further using improved data collection in population subgroups. The extreme health inequity identified demands intensive cross-sectoral policy and service action to prevent exclusion and improve health outcomes in individuals who are already marginalised. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health Research, NHS England, NHS Research Scotland Scottish Senior Clinical Fellowship, Medical Research Council, Chief Scientist Office, and the Central and North West London NHS Trust.

Peer engagement in harm reduction strategies and services: a critical case study and evaluation framework from British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Engaging people with drug use experience, or 'peers,' in decision-making helps to ensure harm reduction services reflect current need. There is little published on the implementation, evaluation, and effectiveness of meaningful peer engagement. This paper aims to describe and evaluate peer engagement in British Columbia from 2010-2014. METHODS: A process evaluation framework specific to peer engagement was developed and used to assess progress made, lessons learned, and future opportunities under four domains: supportive environment, equitable participation, capacity building and empowerment, and improved programming and policy. The evaluation was conducted by reviewing primary and secondary qualitative data including focus groups, formal documents, and meeting minutes. RESULTS: Peer engagement was an iterative process that increased and improved over time as a consequence of reflexive learning. Practical ways to develop trust, redress power imbalances, and improve relationships were crosscutting themes. Lack of support, coordination, and building on existing capacity were factors that could undermine peer engagement. Peers involved across the province reviewed and provided feedback on these results. CONCLUSION: Recommendations from this evaluation can be applied to other peer engagement initiatives in decision-making settings to improve relationships between peers and professionals and to ensure programs and policies are relevant and equitable.

Patient and public views on electronic health records and their uses in the United kingdom: cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The development and implementation of electronic health records (EHRs) remains an international challenge. Better understanding of patient and public attitudes and the factors that influence overall levels of support toward EHRs is needed to inform policy. OBJECTIVE: To explore patient and public attitudes toward integrated EHRs used simultaneously for health care provision, planning and policy, and health research. METHODS: Cross-sectional questionnaire survey administered to patients and members of the public who were recruited from a stratified cluster random sample of 8 outpatient clinics of a major teaching hospital and 8 general practices in London (United Kingdom). RESULTS: 5331 patients and members of the public responded to the survey, with 2857 providing complete data for the analysis presented here. There were moderately high levels of support for integrated EHRs used simultaneously for health care provision, planning and policy, and health research (1785/2857, 62.47%), while 27.93% (798/2857) of participants reported being undecided about whether or not they would support EHR use. There were higher levels of support for specific uses of EHRs. Most participants were in favor of EHRs for personal health care provision (2563/2857, 89.71%), with 66.75% (1907/2857) stating that they would prefer their complete, rather than limited, medical history to be included. Of those "undecided" about integrated EHRs, 87.2% (696/798) were nevertheless in favor of sharing their full (373/798, 46.7%) or limited (323/798, 40.5%) records for health provision purposes. There were similar high levels of support for use of EHRs in health services policy and planning (2274/2857, 79.59%) and research (2325/2857, 81.38%), although 59.75% (1707/2857) and 67.10% (1917/2857) of respondents respectively would prefer their personal identifiers to be removed. Multivariable analysis showed levels of overall support for EHRs decreasing with age. Respondents self-identifying as Black British were more likely to report being undecided or unsupportive of national EHRs. Frequent health services users were more likely to report being supportive than undecided. CONCLUSIONS: Despite previous difficulties with National Health Service (NHS) technology projects, patients and the public generally support the development of integrated EHRs for health care provision, planning and policy, and health research. This support, however, varies between social groups and is not unqualified; relevant safeguards must be in place and patients should be guided in their decision-making process, including increased awareness about the benefits of EHRs for secondary uses.