Noreen Dadirai Mdege

Systematic review of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials shows that design is particularly used to evaluate interventions during routine implementation

OBJECTIVE To describe the application of the stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (CRCT) design. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Systematic review. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, and Current Controlled Trials Register for articles published up to January 2010. Stepped wedge CRCTs from all fields of research were included. Two authors independently reviewed and extracted data from the studies. RESULTS Twenty-five studies were included in the review. Motivations for using the design included ethical, logistical, financial, social, and political acceptability and methodological reasons. Most studies were evaluating an intervention during routine implementation. For most of the included studies, there was also a belief or empirical evidence suggesting that the intervention would do more good than harm. There was variation in data analysis methods and insufficient quality of reporting. CONCLUSIONS The stepped wedge CRCT design has been mainly used for evaluating interventions during routine implementation, particularly for interventions that have been shown to be effective in more controlled research settings, or where there is lack of evidence of effectiveness but there is a strong belief that they will do more good than harm. There is need for consistent data analysis and reporting.

The effectiveness and cost implications of task-shifting in the delivery of antiretroviral therapy to HIV-infected patients: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION Human resource shortages are a challenge to the rollout of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV-infected patients, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Task-shifting has been recommended as an approach to reduce the impact of human resource shortages. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies to assess the effectiveness of task-shifting, and its impact on costs of ART provision. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCINFO, Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge and the Current Controlled Trials Register for articles published up to January 2011. We included studies evaluating any task-shifting model against any other intervention using any of the following outcomes: mortality (all causes); occurrence of new AIDS-defining illness; virological outcomes; CD4 cell count; adherence to ART medicines (e.g. self-report and pill counts); hospital admissions; clinic visits; toxicity or adverse events; quality of life indicators; costs and cost-effectiveness. We did not pool the results because of high levels of clinical heterogeneity. RESULTS We identified six effectiveness studies including a total of 19 767 patients. Non-inferior patient outcomes were achieved with task-shifting from doctors to nurses, or from health care professionals to mid-level workers or lay health workers. However, most of the identified studies were underpowered to detect any difference. Three studies were identified on the cost implications of task-shifting. Task-shifting resulted in substantial cost and physician time savings. CONCLUSIONS The reviewed evidence suggests that task-shifting from doctors to nurses, or from health care professionals to lay health workers can potentially reduce costs of ART provision without compromising health outcomes for patients. Task-shifting is therefore a potentially effective and cost-effective approach to addressing the human resource limitations to ART rollout. However, most of the studies conducted were relatively small and more evidence is needed for each task-shifting model as it is currently limited.

Screening instruments for detecting illicit drug use/abuse that could be useful in general hospital wards: A systematic review

AIM To identify and describe screening instruments for detecting illicit drug use/abuse that are appropriate for use in general hospital wards and review evidence for reliability, validity, feasibility and acceptability. METHODS Instruments were identified from a number of screening instrument databases/libraries and Google Scholar. They were independently assessed for eligibility by two reviewers. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched for articles published up to February 2010. Two reviewers independently assessed the identified articles for eligibility and extracted data from the eligible studies. RESULTS 13 instruments, ASSIST, CAGE-AID, DAST, DHQ/PDHQ, DUDIT, DUS, NMASSIST, SIP-AD, SDS, SMAST-AID, SSI-SA, TICS and UNCOPE were included in the review. They had 2 to 28 items and took less than 10 min to administer and score. Evidence on validity, reliability, acceptability and feasibility of instruments in adult patients not known to have a substance abuse problem was scarce. Of the 21 studies included in the review, only one included participants from general hospital wards. Reported sensitivity, specificity and predictive values varied widely both between studies of the same instrument and also between different instruments. No study was identified comparing two or more of the included instruments. CONCLUSION The review identified and described 13 instruments that could be useful in general hospital wards. There is however lack of evaluation of illicit drug use screening instruments in general hospital wards. Currently clinicians or researchers searching for a simple, reliable, general screening instrument for current drug use to guide practice or research in general hospital wards do not have enough comparative evidence to choose between the available measures.

Interventions for reducing alcohol consumption among general hospital inpatient heavy alcohol users: a systematic review

BACKGROUND There is growing interest in pro-active detection and provision of interventions for heavy alcohol use in the general hospital inpatient population. We aimed to determine, from the available evidence, the effectiveness of interventions in reducing alcohol consumption among general hospital inpatient heavy alcohol users. METHODS The following databases were searched for completed and on-going randomised and non-randomised controlled studies published up to November 2012: MEDLINE; C2-SPECTR; CINAHL; The Cochrane Library; Conference Proceedings Citation Index: Science; EMBASE; HMIC; PsycInfo; Public Health Interventions Cost Effectiveness Database (PHICED); and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies were screened independently by two reviewers. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer and independently checked by a second. RESULTS Twenty-two studies which met the inclusion criteria enrolled 5307 participants in total. All interventions were non-pharmacological and alcohol focused. Results from single session brief interventions and self-help literature showed no clear benefit on alcohol consumption outcomes, with indications of benefit from some studies but not others. However, results suggest brief interventions of more than one session could be beneficial on reducing alcohol consumption, especially for non-dependent patients. No active intervention was found superior over another on alcohol consumption and other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Brief interventions of more than one session could be beneficial on reducing alcohol consumption among hospital inpatients, especially for non-dependent patients. However, additional evidence is still needed before more definitive conclusions can be reached.

There are some circumstances where the stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial is preferable to the alternative: no randomized trial at all. Response to the commentary by Kotz and colleagues

are some circumstances where the stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial is preferable to the alternative: no randomized trial at all. Response to the commentary by Kotz and colleagues. General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: Explore Bristol Research is a digital archive and the intention is that deposited content should not be removed. However, if you believe that this version of the work breaches copyright law please contact open-access@bristol.ac.uk and include the following information in your message: • Your contact details • Bibliographic details for the item, including a URL • An outline of the nature of the complaint On receipt of your message the Open Access Team will immediately investigate your claim, make an initial judgement of the validity of the claim and, where appropriate, withdraw the item in question from public view.

Beyond Food Promotion: A Systematic Review on the Influence of the Food Industry on Obesity-Related Dietary Behaviour among Children

An increased consumption of energy-dense, nutrient-poor food and beverages as a result of a changing obesogenic environment contributes substantially to the increasing prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity. This paper reviews the nature and extent of food industry influences which expose children to commercial influences and thus might affect unhealthy dietary behaviour and finally contributes to obesity. A systematic search of nine electronic databases (including PubMed, PsycINFO, EconLit) and reference lists of original studies and reviews using key search terms identified 1900 articles. Of these only thirty-six articles met the inclusion and quality criteria. A narrative synthesis of the reviewed studies revealed six key obesogenic environments by which the food industry possibly influences obesity-related dietary behaviours in young children. These were schools, retailers, mass media “television”, mass media “internet”, home and promotional campaigns. Identifying these obesogenic environments is critical for monitoring and controlling the food industry, the development of effective environmental-level interventions to prevent childhood overweight and obesity and to identify knowledge gaps to be addressed in future research to support informed decisions of policy makers.

Interventions for alcohol and drug problems in outpatient settings: a systematic review.

ISSUES Research evidence indicates a high prevalence of substance abuse among patients presenting in general hospital settings. Such misuse of alcohol and illicit drugs has a major impact on population health and on costs to health services and to society at large. This review aimed to identify the interventions for alcohol or illicit drug misuse problems that have been evaluated for hospital outpatient populations. APPROACH Thirteen electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycInfo were searched for published and unpublished studies in any language up to August 2011. Reference lists of included studies and reviews were also hand-searched. We included randomised and controlled clinical trials of any intervention for adult participants identified as having alcohol and/or drug problems presenting to hospital outpatient settings other than addiction or psychiatric units. Participants could be attending hospital for any reason other than treatment for substance abuse. A narrative synthesis was conducted. KEY FINDINGS There is some evidence to suggest that interventions based on motivational techniques might be effective in treatment of alcohol misuse in oral-maxillofacial clinics but not in general outpatient departments. The evidence is insufficient to allow any conclusions to be derived on the effectiveness of interventions in the treatment of drug misuse and combined alcohol-drug misuse in outpatient settings. CONCLUSIONS Further research is needed to investigate interventions for alcohol and drug misuse in outpatient settings. Additionally, problems remain in terms of study quality. Procedures to ensure the rigour of a study were often poorly reported.

Tobacco use among people living with HIV: analysis of data from Demographic and Health Surveys from 28 low-income and middle-income countries

Summary Background Tobacco use among people living with HIV results in excess morbidity and mortality. However, very little is known about the extent of tobacco use among people living with HIV in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We assessed the prevalence of tobacco use among people living with HIV in LMICs. Methods We used Demographic and Health Survey data collected between 2003 and 2014 from 28 LMICs where both tobacco use and HIV test data were made publicly available. We estimated the country-specific, regional, and overall prevalence of current tobacco use (smoked, smokeless, and any tobacco use) among 6729 HIV-positive men from 27 LMICs (aged 15–59 years) and 11 495 HIV-positive women from 28 LMICs (aged 15–49 years), and compared them with those in 193 763 HIV-negative men and 222 808 HIV-negative women, respectively. We estimated prevalence separately for males and females as a proportion, and the analysis accounted for sampling weights, clustering, and stratification in the sampling design. We computed pooled regional and overall prevalence estimates through meta-analysis with the application of a random-effects model. We computed country, regional, and overall relative prevalence ratios for tobacco smoking, smokeless tobacco use, and any tobacco use separately for males and females to study differences in prevalence rates between HIV-positive and HIV-negative individuals. Findings The overall prevalence among HIV-positive men was 24·4% (95% CI 21·1–27·8) for tobacco smoking, 3·4% (1·8–5·6) for smokeless tobacco use, and 27·1% (22·8–31·7) for any tobacco use. We found a higher prevalence in HIV-positive men of any tobacco use (risk ratio [RR] 1·41 [95% CI 1·26–1·57]) and tobacco smoking (1·46 [1·30–1·65]) than in HIV-negative men (both p<0·0001). The difference in smokeless tobacco use prevalence between HIV-positive and HIV-negative men was not significant (1·26 [1·00–1·58]; p=0·050). The overall prevalence among HIV-positive women was 1·3% (95% CI 0·8–1·9) for tobacco smoking, 2·1% (1·1–3·4) for smokeless tobacco use, and 3·6% (95% CI 2·3–5·2) for any tobacco use. We found a higher prevalence in HIV-positive women of any tobacco use (RR 1·36 [95% CI 1·10–1·69]; p=0·0050), tobacco smoking (1·90 [1·38–2·62]; p<0·0001), and smokeless tobacco use (1·32 [1·03–1·69]; p=0·030) than in HIV-negative women. Interpretation The high prevalence of tobacco use in people living with HIV in LMICs mandates targeted policy, practice, and research action to promote tobacco cessation and to improve the health outcomes in this population. Funding South African Medical Research Council and the UK Medical Research Council.

Medical specialists' views on the impact of reducing alcohol consumption on prognosis of, and risk of, hospital admission due to specific medical conditions: results from a Delphi survey

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES To find consensus, or lack thereof, on the impact of reducing alcohol consumption on prognosis and the risk of hospital admissions for a number of alcohol-attributable disorders. METHODS A modified two-round Delphi survey utilizing web-based questionnaires to collect quantitative and qualitative data was used. Alcohol treatment experts from cardiology, emergency medicine, gastroenterology and oncology in the United Kingdom were invited to participate. The main outcomes were median impact ratings (on a scale of 1-9) and consensus (unanimous, strong, moderate, weak or no consensus). RESULTS Of 192 experts invited to participate, 59 completed first questionnaires. The overall retention rate to the second questionnaires was about 51% (30/59). There was strong support that reducing alcohol consumption could result in improvement in prognosis for gastroenterology and emergency medicine patients; but uncertainty on the benefits for cardiology and oncology patients. Overall, the responses from the expert panel did not reflect the assumption that reducing alcohol consumption would result in benefits on hospital admissions for any of the specialties. The specialists viewed the severity of disorders as important when considering the impact of reducing alcohol consumption. CONCLUSIONS The highest impact of treatment for problem drinking in hospitals is considered to be for alcohol-related disorders associated with gastroenterology and emergency medicine. At policy level, if targeted screening for alcohol problems by presenting disease or condition is the strategy of choice, it would be logical to implement screening and easily accessible interventions or addiction specialists within these areas where alcohol treatment is considered as having a high impact.

Predictors of study setting (primary care vs. hospital setting) among studies of the effectiveness of brief interventions among heavy alcohol users: a systematic review.

ISSUES The aim of this study is to compare studies by their setting in order to identify design differences between studies on brief interventions (BI) for heavy alcohol use conducted in primary care and those in hospital settings. APPROACH Potential studies were extracted from 16 reviews and from systematically searching literature up to October 2011. We assessed whether the following factors were statistically significant predictors of study setting: exclusion of very heavy/dependent drinkers; mean age of study sample; gender composition of study samples; sample size; total intervention delivery time; number of sessions; interventionist (physician vs. non-physician); various study design and intervention fidelity aspects; accounting for screening/assessment reactivity; and control condition utilised. KEY FINDINGS Seventy-six studies (30 in primary care and 46 in hospital settings) met the inclusion criteria. The following factors were statistically significant predictors of study setting: number of sessions {odds ratio [OR] = 0.281 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.081, 0.979; P = 0.046]}, exclusion of very heavy/dependent drinkers [OR = 0.052 (95% CI 0.004, 0.716, P = 0.027)] and gender composition of study samples [OR = 1.063 (95% CI 1.005, 1.125; P = 0.033)]. IMPLICATIONS Researchers developing hospital setting BIs for excessive alcohol consumption should take into account methodological issues that could explain differences in the consistency of findings between hospital setting studies and primary care setting studies where BIs have been more consistently found effective in reducing alcohol use. CONCLUSION The observed study design differences between hospital and primary care settings might partly explain the disparity in the consistency of findings on effectiveness of BIs between these settings