Dataset Information

Development and pilot evaluation of an educational programme on infection prevention and antibiotics with English and Scottish youth groups, informed by COM-B

ABSTRACT:

Background:

The UK 5-year antimicrobial resistance (AMR) National Action Plan highlights the need to prevent community infections through education of children. Activities around infection prevention (IP) and antibiotics were piloted by UK youth groups in 2016–2018, prompting Public Health England (PHE) to develop a standardised programme. The aim of the study was to develop and pilot an educational programme on IP and antibiotics for use by community youth groups in the UK.

Methods:

A working group, including youth group volunteers interested in IP and AMR, agreed on the programme content through consensus, informed by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour model (COM-B). The Antibiotic Guardian Youth Badge (AGYB) included learning through interactive e-Bug activities on IP and prudent antibiotic use, action setting through Antibiotic Guardian pledges and consolidation through poster development. The programme was piloted and evaluated with conveniently recruited youth groups in 2019, including quantitative and qualitative questionnaire feedback from community leaders and children.

Results:

Fourteen youth group leaders and 232 children from uniformed Girlguiding/Scout groups in England and Scotland participated in the pilot evaluation, as well as two primary schools. Leaders reported alignment to the themes of their youth organisation, but struggled to teach antibiotics and antibiotic resistance. Children reported enjoyment and intentions to improve hygiene behaviour.

Conclusion:

Community youth groups are a suitable setting for IP and antibiotics education. The AGYB was officially launched in March 2020 and promoted for use with home-schooling children and remote youth group meetings to educate about IP during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Hayes C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8512880 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesSimulation is widely employed to teach a range of skills, across healthcare professions and is most effective when embedded within a standarised curriculum. Although recommended by many governing bodies, establishing a national programme of simulation presents many challenges. Successful implementation requires a clear understanding of the priorities and needs of those it seeks to serve yet there are limited examples of how best to do this. This study aimed to develop an integrated national simulation-based educational programme for junior doctors in Scotland through a structed, multistep prioritisation process.DesignA series of action research cycles were undertaken to develop and evaluate a national simulation programme. This paper describes cycle 1, which employed a six-step structured approach to understand and prioritise learner needs.SettingThe study considered the educational needs of Scottish junior doctors in the UK Foundation Programme (UKFP).ParticipantsMultiple stakeholder groups were involved in each stage of the process including recent Scottish UKFP graduates, clinical educators, UKFP programme directors and postgraduate deans.ResultsKey stakeholders reviewed the 370 competencies in the UKFP curriculum and identified 18 initial competency areas. These 18 areas were subsequently prioritised through the analytical hierarchy process, resulting in a carefully ordered list of 12 competencies from which a targeted simulation-based educational programme could be developed.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study to outline the methods of competency prioritisation to create a simulation curriculum that is integrated within a national curriculum in the medical education context. As well as demonstrating the practical steps of such a process, key implications for practice are identified. This robust approach to educational design also resulted in unexpected benefits, including educator and clinician acceptance and programme funding sustainability.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility, acceptability and the impact of an online parenting programme for forcibly displaced parents of adolescents.DesignThe study was a single-arm feasibility study using pre-intervention post-intervention and follow-up assessments.SettingParticipants were recruited from municipality-based activities for refugee parents in a small city in the south of Sweden.ParticipantsParticipants were forcibly displaced parents (n=23; 47.8% maternal figures) of youth (n=23; 8-17 years old; 26.1% female) from Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia participating in an online parenting programme (eConnect).InterventioneConnect is an attachment-based and trauma-informed parenting intervention and was delivered over the course of 10 weekly sessions.Primary and secondary outcome measuresFeasibility was assessed by programme enrolment, attendance, completion and acceptability of the online platform and cultural fit of the programme. Primary outcome measures were programme impact on youth mental health problems. Secondary outcome measures were programme impact on family functioning and parent-child attachment insecurity.ResultsThe eConnect programme was highly feasible in terms of overall enrolment (100%), attendance (89.6%) and retention rates (100%). The online platform was acceptable, with mixed feedback primarily related to the access and usage of technology. Cultural fit of the programme was acceptable. Youth mental health problems (η 2=0.29) and family functioning significantly improved (η 2=0.18) over the course of the programme. Unexpectedly, parent reports of youth attachment insecurity significantly worsened (η 2=0.16).ConclusionsThe findings suggest that the online delivery of Connect was a promising way to reduce barriers to service access and improve mental health problems and family functioning among forcibly displaced parents and their children during COVID-19. Future research is needed to explore the acceptability and impact of this programme post-COVID-19, and to develop culturally tailored and psychometrically sound measures for parent and youth reports of attachment.

Project description:BackgroundThe prevention of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a major concern for health services around the world. The English NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DPP) offers a group face-to-face behaviour change intervention, based around exercise and diet, to adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH), referred from primary care. Previous analysis of the first 100,000 referrals revealed just over half of those referred to the NHS-DPP took up a place. This study aimed to identify the demographic, health and psychosocial factors associated with NHS-DPP uptake to help inform the development of interventions to improve uptake and address inequities between population groups.MethodsDrawing on the Behavioral Model of Health Services Utilization we developed a survey questionnaire to collect data on a wide range of demographic, health and psychosocial factors that might influence uptake of the NHS-DPP. We distributed this questionnaire to a cross-sectional random sample of 597 patients referred to the NHS-DPP across 17 general practices, chosen for variation. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with NHS-DPP uptake.Results325 out of 597 questionnaires were completed (54%). Only a third of responders took up the offer of a place. The best performing model for uptake (AUC = 0.78) consisted of four factors: older age; beliefs concerning personal vulnerability to T2DM; self-efficacy for reducing T2DM risk; and the efficacy of the NHS-DPP. After accounting for these, demographic and health-related factors played only a minor role.ConclusionUnlike fixed demographic characteristics, psychosocial perceptions may be amenable to change. NHS-DPP uptake rates may be improved by targeting the beliefs of patients about their risk of developing T2DM, their ability to carry out and sustain behaviours to reduce this risk, and the efficacy of the NHS-DPP in providing the necessary understanding and skills required. The recently introduced digital version of the NHS DPP could help address the even lower uptake amongst younger adults. Such changes could facilitate proportional access from across different demographic strata.

Project description:BackgroundEpidemiological studies have repeatedly observed a markedly higher risk for coronary artery disease (CAD) in Scotland as compared to England. Up to now, it is unclear whether environmental or genetic factors might explain this phenomenon.MethodsUsing UK Biobank (UKB) data, we assessed CAD risk, based on the Framingham risk score (FRS) and common genetic variants, to explore the respective contribution to CAD prevalence in Scotland (n = 31,963) and England (n = 317,889). We calculated FRS based on sex, age, body mass index (BMI), total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), systolic blood pressure (SBP), antihypertensive medication, smoking status, and diabetes. We determined the allele frequency of published genome-wide significant risk CAD alleles and a weighted genetic risk score (wGRS) for quantifying genetic CAD risk.ResultsPrevalence of CAD was 16% higher in Scotland as compared to England (8.98% vs. 7.68%, P < 0.001). However, the FRS only predicted a marginally higher CAD risk (less than 1%) in Scotland (12.5 ± 10.5 vs.12.6 ± 10.6, P = 0.03). Likewise, the overall number of genome-wide significant variants affecting CAD risk (157.6 ± 7.7 and 157.5 ± 7.7; P = 0.12) and a wGRS for CAD (2.49 ± 0.25 in both populations, P = 0.14) were remarkably similar in the English and Scottish population. Interestingly, we observed substantial differences in the allele frequencies of individual risk variants. Of the previously described 163 genome-wide significant variants studied here, 35 variants had higher frequencies in Scotland, whereas 37 had higher frequencies in England (P < 0.001 each).ConclusionsNeither the traditional risk factors included in the FRS nor a genetic risk score (GRS) based on established common risk alleles explained the higher CAD prevalence in Scotland. However, we observed marked differences in the distribution of individual risk alleles, which emphasizes that even geographically and ethnically closely related populations may display relevant differences in the genetic architecture of a common disease.

Project description:Background and study aims This early phase study aims to assess what patient responses would be if they were given personalised risk information about their chances of having colorectal (bowel) cancer. In Scotland the existing bowel screening test (the guaiac Faecal Occult Blood test) is being replaced by a new test, called the Faecal Immunochemical Test (FIT), which requires a single stool sample. This test is easier to do and also gives more accurate information about an individual’s risk of having colorectal cancer, based on their age and sex. The aim of this study is to test whether giving individuals personalised information on their risk of colorectal cancer, would help them to decide what is best for them, when weighed up alongside the risks of having further investigation via a colonoscopy (i.e. a test where a tiny camera is inserted into the bowel to check for anything which is out of the ordinary). It will also assess whether this would lead to more or fewer people deciding to have a colonoscopy and aims to find out the best way of presenting this information, so that people can fully understand it. Who can participate? Adults aged 50-74 registered on the Scottish Bowel Screening database. What does the study involve? Participants are randomised to one of three groups to receive information about their risk of cancer following a hypothetical result for detected faecal haemoglobin concentration (amount of blood in their stool sample), based on their age, gender and faecal haemoglobin concentration: 1) personalised risk information in numeric form (e.g. 1 in 100), 2) personalised information described as ‘high’, ‘medium’ or ‘low’ risk, and 3) as a ‘positive’ test result, as is currently given to people. The best methods to present this information is determined by this study, with the help of members of the public, two of who are part of the project team. Each participant is sent the information by letter and asked to say whether or not they would intend to take up the offer of a colonoscopy for each level of risk. The groups are compared on whether or not their decision was based on a sound understanding of the information (informed choice), whether or not they intend to have a colonoscopy, and how satisfied they are with their decision.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate an informed shared decision-making programme (ISDM-P) for people with type 2 diabetes under high fidelity conditions. DESIGN:Randomised, single-blinded trial with sham control intervention and follow-up of 6 months. SETTING:Single-centre diabetes clinic providing care according to the national disease management programme in Germany. PARTICIPANTS:154 people with type 2 diabetes without diagnosis of ischaemic heart disease or stroke. INTERVENTIONS:The ISDM-P is executed by diabetes educators. Core component is a patient decision aid on the prevention of myocardial infarction supplemented by a 90 min group teaching session. The structurally equivalent control intervention addresses stress issues. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcome was risk comprehension, including realistic expectations about benefits and harms of interventions. It was assessed by a 12-item questionnaire after the teaching session when patients set and prioritise their treatment goals. Key secondary outcome was adherence to treatment goals, operationalised as achievement of individual goals and medication uptake. ISDM-P teaching sessions were video-taped to monitor intervention fidelity. RESULTS:72 of 77 ISDM-P and 71 of 77 control patients completed the questionnaire (score 0-12). ISDM-P patients achieved higher levels of risk comprehension, mean score 8.25 vs 2.62, difference 5.63 (95% CI 4.82 to 6.44), and realistic expectations (score 0-6), 4.51 vs 0.85, 3.67 (3.23 to 4.11). More ISDM-P patients wished to take statins, 59.2% vs 30.4%, 28.7% (12.9% to 44.5%); more prioritised blood pressure control, 51.4% vs 25.7%, and fewer intensive glucose control, 33.3% vs 60%, p=0.002. More ISDM-P patients achieved their glycated haemoglobin goals, 95.8% vs 85.7%, 10.1% (0.6% to 19.5%). Achievement of prioritised goals and medication uptake were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS:The ISDM-P on preventive measures in type 2 diabetes was effective under high fidelity conditions. Involvement of diabetes educators may facilitate implementation of the informed shared decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ISRCTN84636255.