Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
PLOS Glob Public Health ; 3(7): e0001381, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37410723

RESUMO

We conducted an independent evaluation on the effectiveness of an organisational-level monetary incentive to encourage small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to improve employees' health and wellbeing. This was A mixed-methods cluster randomised trial with four arms: high monetary incentive, low monetary incentive, and two no monetary incentive controls (with or without baseline measurements to examine 'reactivity' The consequence of particpant awareness of being studied, and potential impact on participant behavior effects). SMEs with 10-250 staff based in West Midlands, England were eligible. We randomly selected up to 15 employees at baseline and 11 months post-intervention. We elicited employee perceptions of employers' actions to improve health and wellbeing; and employees' self-reported health behaviours and wellbeing. We also interviewed employers and obtained qualitative data. One hundred and fifty-two SMEs were recruited. Baseline assessments were conducted in 85 SMEs in three arms, and endline assessments in 100 SMEs across all four arms. The percentage of employees perceiving "positive action" by their employer increased after intervention (5 percentage points, pp [95% Credible Interval -3, 21] and 3pp [-9, 17], in models for high and low incentive groups). Across six secondary questions about specific issues the results were strongly and consistently positive, especially for the high incentive. This was consistent with qualitative data and quantitative employer interviews. However, there was no evidence of any impact on employee health behaviour or wellbeing outcomes, nor evidence of 'reactivity'. An organisational intervention (a monetary incentive) changed employee perceptions of employer behaviour but did not translate into changes in employees' self-reports of their own health behaviours or wellbeing. Trial registration: AEARCTR-0003420, registration date: 17.10.2018, retrospectively registered (delays in contracts and identfying a suitable trial registry). The authors confirm that there are no ongoing and related trials for this intervention.

2.
Arch Dis Child ; 102(2): 123-130, 2017 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27417307

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoke exposure in adults is linked to adverse anaesthetic and surgical outcomes. Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure, including passive smoking, causes a number of known harms in children, but there is no established evidence review on its impact on intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To undertake a systematic review of the impact of ETS on the paediatric surgical pathway and to establish if there is evidence of anaesthetic, intraoperative and postoperative harm. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 0-18 years undergoing anaesthetic or surgical procedures, any country, English language papers. EXPOSURE: ETS exposure assessed via questioning, observation or biological marker. OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of respiratory and other adverse events during anaesthesia, surgery and recovery, and longer term surgical outcomes. RESULTS: 28 relevant studies were identified; 15 considered anaesthetic outcomes, 12 surgical outcomes, and 1 a secondary outcome. There was sufficient evidence to demonstrate that environmental smoke exposure significantly increased risk of perianaesthetic respiratory adverse events (Pooled risk ratio 2.52 CI 95% 1.68 to 3.77), and some evidence that ear and sinus surgery outcomes were poorer for children exposed to ETS. CONCLUSIONS: ETS exposure increases the risk of anaesthetic complications and some negative surgical outcomes in children, and this should be considered when planning surgery. Research is required to demonstrate whether changes in household smoking behaviour prior to surgery reduces risk of adverse outcomes, and to close the evidence gap around other outcomes such as wound healing and respiratory infections. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Review registration number 42014014557.


Assuntos
Anestésicos/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco/efeitos adversos , Adolescente , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Exposição Ambiental/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios , Prognóstico , Doenças Respiratórias/etiologia , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Cicatrização/fisiologia , Adulto Jovem
3.
Syst Rev ; 3: 90, 2014 Aug 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25128186

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, there are an estimated 15 million individuals with drug use disorders and over five times as many with alcohol use disorders (WHO 1:2, 2005). Most individuals with substance misuse have families who are affected. Initial scoping searches identified an expanse of broad and disparate studies and reviews on the family interventions for substance misuse. This systematic review of systematic reviews aims to bring together the expanse of research on the effectiveness of family-based interventions in substance misuse.Initial scoping searches identified an expanse of broad and disparate studies and reviews on the family interventions for substance misuse. This systematic review of systematic reviews aims to bring together the expanse of research on the effectiveness of family-based interventions in substance misuse. METHODS: Extensive electronic and manual searches will be undertaken. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment will be undertaken by two reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion.The inclusion criteria will be that the study is a systematically undertaken review, the population is individuals with substance misuse problems and the interventions include a family-focused component. Reviews that focus on prevention rather than treatment will be excluded. The reviews will be assessed for quality and relevance. The evidence from included systematic reviews will be mapped by focus of intervention (promoting engagement of user into treatment/joint involvement in treatment of user/treating family member in own right) for both adults and adolescents for drug and/or alcohol misusers to allow assessment of the density of available evidence. The higher-quality, up-to-date evidence for each domain will be identified and described, and conclusions will be drawn with limitations of the evidence highlighted. DISCUSSION: This systematic review of systematic reviews will be an efficient and robust way of looking at the current state of the evidence in the field of family-based interventions for substance misuse. It will evaluate all the available systematic-review-level literature to report on the effectiveness of family-based psychological interventions in improving substance-related outcomes and improving health and wellbeing of substance misusers and/or their families. This will inform future treatment policies and commissioning decisions.In addition, it will identify areas of poor quality, inconsistency and gaps in the evidence base for family-based psychological interventions in substance misuse with respect to secondary evidence in order to inform future research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014006834.


Assuntos
Terapia Familiar , Família/psicologia , Projetos de Pesquisa , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/terapia , Humanos , Literatura de Revisão como Assunto , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/psicologia , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...