Enhancing the SUSTAINable uptake of evidence to minimise harms from alcohol and other drugs in New South Wales, Australia.

Although alcohol and other drug use is increasingly the focus of policy and research efforts, there are challenges identifying and applying evidence-based strategies to minimise harms for alcohol and other drugs in health care and community settings. These challenges include limited available research, variability across settings, and lack of 'fit' between research evidence and their intended settings. In this commentary, we describe a novel approach to develop and evaluate tailored, sustainable strategies to enhance the uptake of evidence-based activities into health services and community settings. Our approach involves four key principles: (i) identifying evidence-based alcohol and other drug harm minimisation strategies; (ii) partnering with local experts to identify and tailor strategies; (iii) implementing strategies into existing practice/infrastructure to build in sustainability; and (iv) using sustainable co-designed outcome measures including value-based health-care principles to measure uptake, feasibility and acceptability, health outcomes and economic implications. We propose that this approach offers a way forward to enhance the relevance and suitability of research in health services and community settings and has potential to be applied in other sectors.

Hepatitis C in people with mental illness: how big is the problem and how do we respond?

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence available on best practice care of people with both hepatitis C and mental illness and its application in a mental health service. METHODS: A literature search was conducted for publications dealing with screening, referral for specialist review and antiviral treatment for this population group. RESULTS: A small number of studies was identified that specifically dealt with screening and treatment for hepatitis C in people with mental illness. CONCLUSIONS: Screening, referral and treatment for hepatitis C in people with mental illness is worthwhile and achievable.

Development of a risk-priority score for category A bioterrorism agents as an aid for public health policy.

In developing public health policy and planning for a bioterrorist attack or vaccination of military personnel, the most common method for assigning priority is using the probability of attack with a particular agent as the single criterion. Using this approach, smallpox is often dismissed as an unlikely threat. We aimed to develop an evidence-based, systematic, multifactorial method for prioritizing the level of risk of each category A bioterrorism agent. Using 10 criterion, anthrax scored the highest, followed by smallpox. Tularemia was the lowest scoring agent. We suggest that such a system would be useful for developing public policy, stockpiling of vaccines and therapeutics, vaccination of military personnel, and planning for public health responses to a bioterrorist attack.