Reducing intervention- and research-induced inequalities to tackle the digital divide in health promotion.

Social inequalities are an important contributor to the global burden of disease within and between countries. Using digital technology in health promotion and healthcare is seen by some as a potential lever to reduce these inequalities; however, research suggests that digital technology risks re-enacting or evening widening disparities. Most research on this digital health divide focuses on a small number of social inequality indicators and stems from Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) countries. There is a need for systematic, international, and interdisciplinary contextualized research on the impact of social inequality indicators in digital health as well as the underlying mechanisms of this digital divide across the globe to reduce health disparities. In June 2023, eighteen multi-disciplinary researchers representing thirteen countries from six continents came together to discuss current issues in the field of digital health promotion and healthcare contributing to the digital divide. Ways that current practices in research contribute to the digital health divide were explored, including intervention development, testing, and implementation. Based on the dialogue, we provide suggestions for overcoming barriers and improving practices across disciplines, countries, and sectors. The research community must actively advocate for system-level changes regarding policy and research to reduce the digital divide and so improve digital health for all.

Digital health interventions for all? Examining inclusivity across all stages of the digital health intervention research process.

Digital interventions offer many possibilities for improving health, as remote interventions can enhance reach and access to underserved groups of society. However, research evaluating digital health interventions demonstrates that such technologies do not equally benefit all and that some in fact seem to reinforce a "digital health divide." By better understanding these potential pitfalls, we may contribute to narrowing the digital divide in health promotion. The aim of this article is to highlight and reflect upon study design decisions that might unintentionally enhance inequities across key research stages-recruitment, enrollment, engagement, efficacy/effectiveness, and retention. To address the concerns highlighted, we propose strategies including (1) the standard definition of "effectiveness" should be revised to include a measure of inclusivity; (2) studies should report a broad range of potential inequity indicators of participants recruited, randomized, and retained and should conduct sensitivity analyses examining potential sociodemographic differences for both the effect and engagement of the digital interventions; (3) participants from historically marginalized groups should be involved in the design of study procedures, including those related to recruitment, consent, intervention implementation and engagement, assessment, and retention; (4) eligibility criteria should be minimized and carefully selected and the screening process should be streamlined; (5) preregistration of trials should include recruitment benchmarks for sample diversity and comprehensive lists of sociodemographic characteristics assessed; and (6) studies within trials should be embedded to systematically test recruitment and retention strategies to improve inclusivity. The implementation of these strategies would enhance the ability of digital health trials to recruit, randomize, engage, and retain a broader and more representative population in trials, ultimately minimizing the digital divide and broadly improving population health.

Prevention and early help for eating disorders in young people with type 1 diabetes.

There is building evidence that early intervention is key to improving outcomes in eating disorders, whereas a 'watch and wait' approach that has been commonplace among GPs and other healthcare professionals is now strongly discouraged. Eating disorders occur at approximately twice the rate in individuals with type 1 diabetes compared to the general population. In this group, standard eating disorder treatments have poorer outcomes, and eating disorders result in a particularly high burden of morbidity. Therefore, our first priority must be prevention, with early intervention where disordered eating has already developed. Clinicians working in both eating disorders and diabetes specialist services have highlighted the need for multidisciplinary team collaboration and specific training, as well as improved treatments. We review the current evidence and future directions for prevention, identification and early intervention for eating disorders in children and young people with type 1 diabetes.

Reconsidering a role for attachment in eating disorder management in the context of paediatric diabetes.

We suggest a reconsideration of the role of 'attachment orientation' in the context of eating disorders and paediatric diabetes. Attachment orientation is a psychological construct that describes a relatively stable set of expectations and behaviours an individual relies upon in managing relationships. There is considerable evidence of an association between attachment orientation and the development and maintenance of disordered eating in individuals without diabetes, though evidence is more scant in populations with diabetes. We discuss the underpinning theory and critically examine the existing literature for the relationship between attachment orientation and disordered eating in paediatric diabetes. Finally, we draw on adjacent literatures to highlight potential future directions for research should this area be revisited. Overall, we contextualise our discussion in terms of patient-centred, holistic care that addresses the mind and body (i.e., our discussion of attachment orientation assumes a psycho-biological approach).

Does electronic consent improve the logistics and uptake of HPV vaccination in adolescent girls? A mixed-methods theory informed evaluation of a pilot intervention.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usability and acceptability of an electronic consent pilot intervention for school-based immunisations and assess its impact on consent form returns and human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine uptake. DESIGN: Mixed-methods theory-informed study applying qualitative methods to examine the usability and acceptability of the intervention and quantitative methods to assess its impact. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The intervention was piloted in 14 secondary schools in seven London boroughs in 2018. Intervention schools were matched with schools using paper consent based on the proportion of students with English as a second language and students receiving free school meals. Participants included nurses, data managers, school-link staff, parents and adolescents. INTERVENTIONS: An electronic consent portal where parents could record whether they agreed to or declined vaccination, and nurses could access data to help them manage the immunisation programme. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of consent form return rates and HPV vaccine uptake between intervention and matched schools. RESULTS: HPV vaccination uptake did not differ between intervention and matched schools, but timely consent form return was significantly lower in intervention schools (73.3% vs 91.6%, p=0.008). The transition to using electronic consent was not straightforward, while schools and staff understood the potential benefits, they found it difficult to adapt to new ways of working which removed some level of control from schools. Reasons for lower consent form return in e-consent schools included difficulties encountered by some parents in accessing and using the intervention. Adolescents highlighted the potential for electronic consent to by-pass their information needs. CONCLUSIONS: The pilot intervention did not improve consent form return or vaccine uptake due to challenges encountered in transitioning to new working practice. New technologies require embedding before they become incorporated in everyday practice. A re-evaluation once stakeholders are accustomed with electronic consent may be required to understand its impact.

Reducing falls in a care home.

Care home residents are 3 times more likely to fall than their community dwelling peers and 10 times more likely to sustain a significant injury as a result. 2 A project commenced at a care home in Aberdeen with the aim of reducing the number of falls by 20% by 30st April 2016 using the model for improvement. Qualitative data was gathered to establish staff belief about falls and their level of knowledge& understanding about falls risks and how to manage these. This informed the training which was delivered and iterative testing commenced with the introduction of the Lanarkshire Falls Risk/Intervention tool - where the multifactorial nature of a resident's falls risks are explored and specific actions to manage these are identified and implemented. Failure to meet PDSA predictions about sharing risk reducing actions with staff and length of time to complete the tool prompted a focus on communication and the processes whereby the tool is completed. "Teach back" was employed to highlight communication difficulties and ultimately the introduction of Huddles out improved the flow of information about residents and informed the Falls Risk/Intervention tool. 5 PDSAs were completed and within them multiple tests of change. The improvement shift came following a root cause analysis of the nature & cause of one resident's falls and applying the tool & communication processes. The average falls rate fell from 49 per 1000 occupied bed days to 23.6 and was sustained because of the attention to the importance of communication. The aim was achieved with a 36.6% reduction in Falls rate. Care home residents are 3 times more likely to fall than their community dwelling peers and 10 times more likely to sustain a significant injury as a result. 2 A project commenced at a care home in Aberdeen with the aim of reducing the number of falls by 20% by 30th April 2016 using the model for improvement. Qualitative data was gathered to establish staff belief about falls and their level of knowledge& understanding about falls risks and how to manage these. This informed the training which was delivered and iterative testing commenced with the introduction of the Lanarkshire Falls Risk/Intervention tool - where the multifactorial nature of a resident's falls risks are explored and specific actions to manage these are identified and implemented. Failure to meet PDSA predictions about sharing risk reducing actions with staff and length of time to complete the tool prompted a focus on communication and the processes whereby the tool is completed. "Teach back" was employed to highlight communication difficulties and the introduction of Huddles improved the flow of information. 5 PDSAs were completed and within them multiple tests of change. The improvement shift came following a root cause analysis of the nature & cause of one resident's falls and applying the tool & communication processes. The average falls rate fell from 49 per 1000 occupied bed days to 23.6 and was sustained because of the attention to the importance of communication. The aim was achieved with a 36.6% reduction in Falls rate.