Dataset Information

A randomized trial of a multi-level intervention to increase water access and appeal in community recreation centers.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Improving children's tap water intake and reducing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption is beneficial for health and health equity, particularly in low-income communities and communities of color. Existing community level interventions to improve the intake of tap water have predominantly occurred in schools and have focused on promoting water consumption in cafeterias during lunch or snack periods. METHODS:The "Hydrate Philly" intervention was developed to target multiple environmental and social factors to improve tap water consumption in community recreation centers in low-income communities: replacing old and unappealing water fountains with appealing water-bottle-filling "hydration stations", conducting water safety testing and publicizing results, disseminating reusable water bottles, promoting tap water, and discouraging SSB consumption. Efficacy of the intervention will be tested through a group-randomized controlled trial (n?=?28 centers) of the intervention's impact on center-level water fountain/station use as measured by flow meters during a youth summer camp program primarily for children aged 6-12?years. Intervention impact on the primary outcome (use of drinking water sources) will be examined with a difference-in-differences approach using an ordinary least squares regression model for analysis at the center level. Secondary outcomes include SSBs brought to summer camp, reusable and single-use bottled water use, program trash, and recreation center staff SSB consumption. DISCUSSION:Multilevel approaches are needed to increase tap water intake and decrease SSB consumption among low-income and minority youth beyond school and meal settings. The current study describes the Hydrate Philly intervention, the study design, and baseline characteristics of recreation centers participating in the study. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: #NCT03637465.

SUBMITTER: Lawman HG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6499604 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomized trial of a multi-level intervention to increase water access and appeal in community recreation centers.

Lawman Hannah G HG Lofton Xavier X Grossman Sara S Root Mica M Perez Meka M Tasian Gregory G Patel Anisha A

Contemporary clinical trials 20190213

<h4>Introduction</h4>Improving children's tap water intake and reducing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption is beneficial for health and health equity, particularly in low-income communities and communities of color. Existing community level interventions to improve the intake of tap water have predominantly occurred in schools and have focused on promoting water consumption in cafeterias during lunch or snack periods.<h4>Methods</h4>The "Hydrate Philly" intervention was developed to targ ...[more]

PMID: 30771559

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite a global call for action and growing burden of non-communicable diseases (NCD) associated with physical inactivity, effective interventions to increase community-wide physical activity (PA) remain few. NCDs accounted for 80% of Singapore's disease burden (2015) and yet 40% of Singaporeans did not meet minimum recommended weekly PA despite evidence of the benefits to cardiorespiratory health, diabetes and cancer prevention.MethodsA large-scale public health intervention was initiated in 2015 to increase population-level PA through incidental daily walking. Intervention components included fitness trackers, redeemable rewards and gamification, implemented in a mutually-reinforcing manner within an eco-system supportive of PA and informed by real-time data analytics. Mean daily step count at baseline and post-intervention were compared across periods, and the influence of participant sub-groups characteristics on overall results, using significance tests. Standards for Reporting on Implementation Studies (StaRI) were adhered to.ResultsIntervention reach increased fourfold from 129,677 participants in wave 1 (2015-16) to 690,233 in wave 3 (2017-18) amounting to a total of 1,184,410 Step Challenge participations. Mean days of fitness tracker use increased from 2.4 to 5.0 days/week among participants completing the Challenge in wave 1 and from 5.3 to 6.0 days/week in wave 3. The mean number of daily steps between pre-Challenge and Challenge periods increased by 4163 (sd=1360; p< 0.001) in wave 1, by 2242 (sd=334; p< 0.001) in wave 2 and by 1645 steps/day (sd=54; p< 0.001) in wave 3. Mean daily step increases between wave 1 and 3 also suggest that incidental PA was maintained, a finding supported by a 2017 national population survey showing that incidental PA among adults increased from 5% in 2010 to 14% in 2017 while moderate-intensity PA increased from 5 to 10% over the same period.ConclusionPopulation-level PA was effectively increased through multi-level interventions integrating technology, behavioural economics, gamification, marketing, communications and community linkages within a supportive context- and climate-appropriate environment. Responsive data analytics were instrumental to strengthen implementation by tailoring modalities that maximise effectiveness at population-level. Further analyses are needed to explore potential barriers, challenges or unmet needs in sub-groups with lower uptake to tailor future interventions for greater reach and impact.

Project description:BackgroundThe United States has been grappling with the opioid epidemic, which has resulted in over 75,000 opioid-related deaths between April 2020 and 2021. Evidence-based pharmaceutical interventions (buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone) are available to reduce opioid-related overdoses and deaths. However, adoption of these medications for opioid use disorder has been stifled due to individual- and system-level barriers. External facilitation is an evidence-based implementation intervention that has been used to increase access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), but the implementation costs of external facilitation have not been assessed. We sought to measure the facility-level direct costs of implementing an external facilitation intervention for MOUD to provide decision makers with estimates of the resources needed to implement this evidence-based program.MethodsWe performed a cost analysis of the pre-implementation and implementation phases, including an itemization of external facilitation team and local site labor costs. We used labor estimates from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, and sensitivity analyses were performed using labor estimates from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Financial Management System general ledger data.ResultsThe average total costs for implementing an external facilitation intervention for MOUD per site was $18,847 (SD 6717) and ranged between $11,320 and $31,592. This translates to approximately $48 per patient with OUD. Sites with more encounters and participants with higher salaries in attendance had higher costs. This was driven mostly by the labor involved in planning and implementation activities. The average total cost of the pre-implementation and implementation activities were $1031 and $17,816 per site, respectively. In the sensitivity analysis, costs for VHA were higher than BLS estimates likely due to higher wages.ConclusionsImplementing external facilitation to increase MOUD prescribing may be affordable depending on the payer's budget constraints. Our study reported that there were variations in the time invested at each phase of implementation and the number and type of participants involved with implementing an external facilitation intervention. Participant composition played an important role in total implementation costs, and decision makers will need to identify the most efficient and optimal number of stakeholders to involve in their implementation plans.

Project description:ImportanceResponding to the substantial research on the relationship between social risk factors and health, enthusiasm has grown around social risk screening in health care settings, and numerous US health systems are experimenting with social risk screening initiatives. In the absence of standard social risk screening recommendations, some health systems are exploring using publicly available community-level data to identify patients who live in the most vulnerable communities as a way to characterize patient social and economic contexts, identify patients with potential social risks, and/or to target social risk screening efforts.ObjectiveTo explore the utility of community-level data for accurately identifying patients with social risks by comparing the social deprivation index score for the census tract where a patient lives with patient-level social risk screening data.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional study using patient-level social risk screening data from the electronic health records of a national network of community health centers between June 24, 2016, and November 15, 2018, linked to geocoded community-level data from publicly available sources. Eligible patients were those with a recorded response to social risk screening questions about food, housing, and/or financial resource strain, and a valid address of sufficient quality for geocoding.ExposuresSocial risk screening documented in the electronic health record.Main outcomes and measuresCommunity-level social risk was assessed using census tract-level social deprivation index score stratified by quartile. Patient-level social risks were identified using food insecurity, housing insecurity, and financial resource strain screening responses.ResultsThe final study sample included 36 578 patients from 13 US states; 22 113 (60.5%) received public insurance, 21 181 (57.9%) were female, 17 578 (48.1%) were White, and 10 918 (29.8%) were Black. Although 6516 (60.0%) of those with at least 1 social risk factor were in the most deprived quartile of census tracts, patients with social risk factors lived in all census tracts. Overall, the accuracy of the community-level data for identifying patients with and without social risks was 48.0%.Conclusions and relevanceAlthough there is overlap, patient-level and community-level approaches for assessing patient social risks are not equivalent. Using community-level data to guide patient-level activities may mean that some patients who could benefit from targeted interventions or care adjustments would not be identified.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Tobacco use remains the leading cause of death and disability in the USA and is disproportionately concentrated among low socioeconomic status (SES) populations. Community Health Centers (CHCs) are a key venue for reaching low SES populations with evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment such as Quitlines. Electronic health record (EHR)-based interventions at the point-of-care, text messaging (TM), and phone counseling have the potential to increase Quitline reach and are feasible to implement within CHCs. However, there is a lack of data to inform how, when, and in what combination these strategies should be implemented. The aims of this cluster-randomized trial are to evaluate multi-level implementation strategies to increase the Reach (i.e., proportion of tobacco-using patients who enroll in the Quitline) and Impact (i.e., Reach × Efficacy [efficacy is defined as the proportion of tobacco-using patients who enroll in Quitline treatment that successfully quit]) and to evaluate characteristics of healthcare system, providers, and patients that may influence tobacco-use outcomes. METHODS:This study is a multilevel, three-phase, Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART), conducted in CHCs (N?=?33 clinics; N?=?6000 patients). In the first phase, clinics will be randomized to two different EHR conditions. The second and third phases are patient-level randomizations based on prior treatment response. Patients who enroll in the Quitline receive no further interventions. In phase two, patients who are non-responders (i.e., patients who do not enroll in Quitline) will be randomized to receive either TM or continued-EHR. In phase three, patients in the TM condition who are non-responders will be randomized to receive either continued-TM or TM?+?phone coaching. DISCUSSION:This project will evaluate scalable, multi-level interventions to directly address strategic national priorities for reducing tobacco use and related disparities by increasing the Reach and Impact of evidence-based tobacco cessation interventions in low SES populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03900767) on April 4th, 2019.

Project description:Adequate fruit and vegetable (F&V) intake is important for disease prevention. Yet, most Americans, especially low-income and racial/ethnic minorities, do not eat adequate amounts. These disparities are partly attributable to food environments in low-income neighborhoods where residents often have limited access to affordable, healthful food and easy access to inexpensive, unhealthful foods. Increasing access to affordable healthful food in underserved neighborhoods through mobile markets is a promising, year-round strategy for improving dietary behaviors and reducing F&V intake disparities. However, to date, there have been no randomized controlled trials studying their effectiveness. The objective of the 'Live Well, Viva Bien' (LWVB) cluster randomized controlled trial is to evaluate the efficacy of a multicomponent mobile market intervention at increasing F&V intake among residents of subsidized housing complexes.One housing complex served as a pilot site for the intervention group and the remaining 14 demographically-matched sites were randomized into either the intervention or control group. The intervention group received bimonthly, discount, mobile, fresh F&V markets in conjunction with a nutrition education intervention (two F&V campaigns, newsletters, DVDs and cooking demonstrations) for 12 months. The control group received physical activity and stress reduction interventions. Outcome measures include F&V intake (measured by two validated F&V screeners at baseline, six-month and twelve-months) along with potential psychosocial mediating variables. Extensive quantitative and qualitative process evaluation was also conducted throughout the study.Modifying neighborhood food environments in ways that increase access to affordable, healthful food is a promising strategy for improving dietary behaviors among low-income, racial and ethnic minority groups at increased risk for obesity and other food-related chronic diseases. Discount, mobile F&V markets address all the major barriers to eating more F&V (high cost, poor quality, limited access and limited time to shop and cook) and provide a year-round solution to limited access to healthful food in low-income neighborhoods. LWVB is the first randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of mobile markets at increasing F&V intake. If proven efficacious at increasing F&V consumption, LWVB could be disseminated widely to neighborhoods that have low access to fresh F&V.Clinicatrials.gov registration number: NCT02669472 First Received: January 19, 2016.

Project description:BackgroundWastewater-impacted waters that do not support swimming are often used for boating, canoeing, fishing, kayaking, and rowing. Little is known about the health risks of these limited-contact water recreation activities.ObjectivesWe evaluated the incidence of illness, severity of illness, associations between water exposure and illness, and risk of illness attributable to limited-contact water recreation on waters dominated by wastewater effluent and on waters approved for general use recreation (such as swimming).MethodsThe Chicago Health, Environmental Exposure, and Recreation Study was a prospective cohort study that evaluated five health outcomes among three groups of people: those who engaged in limited-contact water recreation on effluent-dominated waters, those who engaged in limited-contact recreation on general-use waters, and those who engaged in non-water recreation. Data analysis included survival analysis, logistic regression, and estimates of risk for counterfactual exposure scenarios using G-computation.ResultsTelephone follow-up data were available for 11,297 participants. With non-water recreation as the reference group, we found that limited-contact water recreation was associated with the development of acute gastrointestinal illness in the first 3 days after water recreation at both effluent-dominated waters [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08, 1.96] and general-use waters (1.50; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.07). For every 1,000 recreators, 13.7 (95% CI: 3.1, 24.9) and 15.1 (95% CI: 2.6, 25.7) cases of gastrointestinal illness were attributable to limited-contact recreation at effluent-dominated waters and general-use waters, respectively. Eye symptoms were associated with use of effluent-dominated waters only (AOR 1.50; 95% CI: 1.10, 2.06). Among water recreators, our results indicate that illness was associated with the amount of water exposure.ConclusionsLimited-contact recreation, both on effluent-dominated waters and on waters designated for general use, was associated with an elevated risk of gastrointestinal illness.

Dataset Information

A randomized trial of a multi-level intervention to increase water access and appeal in community recreation centers.

Publications

A randomized trial of a multi-level intervention to increase water access and appeal in community recreation centers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets