A systemic framework of energy efficiency in schools: experiences from six European countries.

Schools are complex physical and social institutions within national education systems. They account for significant energy consumption and like other buildings can demonstrate inefficient patterns of energy use. Poor energy performance of educational facilities is an intricate issue driven by complex causality of interconnected and dynamic factors. Addressing this issue requires a systemic approach, which is heretofore lacking. The aim of this research is to present and describe a systemic framework to facilitate energy reduction in schools across different European contexts. This transdisciplinary approach to sustainable energy use has been piloted in 13 post-primary schools located in six countries in northwest Europe. The research implements a series of planned activities and interventions, which help to unveil a systemic approach to improving energy efficiency in schools. The findings demonstrate how this approach, together with its ensuing methodologies and strategies, can contribute to reducing carbon emissions and improve knowledge and awareness around sustainable energy.

Identifying interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance in the intensive care unit through co-design with stakeholders.

Background: Despite the effectiveness of hand hygiene (HH) for infection control, there is a lack of robust scientific data to guide how HH can be improved in intensive care units (ICUs).  The aim of this study is to use the literature, researcher, and stakeholder opinion to explicate potential interventions for improving HH compliance in the ICU, and provide an indication of the suitability of these interventions. Methods: A four-phase co-design study was designed. First, data from a previously completed systematic literature review was used in order to identify unique components of existing interventions to improve HH in ICUs. Second, a workshop was held with a panel of 10 experts to identify additional intervention components. Third, the 91 intervention components resulting from the literature review and workshop were synthesised into a final list of 21 hand hygiene interventions. Finally, the affordability, practicability, effectiveness, acceptability, side-effects/safety, and equity of each intervention was rated by 39 stakeholders (health services researchers, ICU staff, and the public). Results: Ensuring the availability of essential supplies for HH compliance was the intervention that received most approval from stakeholders. Interventions involving role models and peer-to-peer accountability and support were also well regarded by stakeholders. Education/training interventions were commonplace and popular. Punitive interventions were poorly regarded. Conclusions: Hospitals and regulators must make decisions regarding how to improve HH compliance in the absence of scientific consensus on effective methods. Using collective input and a co-design approach, the guidance developed herein may usefully support implementation of HH interventions that are considered to be effective and acceptable by stakeholders.

The feasibility of a Comprehensive Resilience-building psychosocial Intervention (CREST) for people with dementia in the community: protocol for a non-randomised feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: A dementia diagnosis can prevent people from participating in society, leading to a further decline in cognitive, social and physical health. However, it may be possible for people with dementia to continue to live meaningful lives and continue to participate actively in society if a supportive psychosocial environment exists. Resilience theory, which focuses on strengthening personal attributes and external assets in the face of serious challenges, may provide a scaffold on which an inclusive multifaceted psychosocial supportive environment can be built. This protocol paper describes a study to determine the feasibility of conducting a multifaceted complex resilience building psychosocial intervention for people with dementia and their caregivers living in the community. METHODS: This is a non-randomised feasibility study. Ten participants with dementia and their primary caregivers living in the community will be recruited and receive the CREST intervention. The intervention provides (a) a 7-week cognitive stimulation programme followed by an 8-week physical exercise programme for people with dementia and (b) a 6-week educational programme for caregivers. Members of the wider community will be invited to a dementia awareness programme and GP practices to a dementia training workshop. Trained professionals will deliver all intervention components. Outcomes will assess the feasibility and acceptability of all study processes. The feasibility and acceptability of a range of outcomes to be collected in a future definitive trial, including economic measurements, will also be explored. Finally, social marketing will be used to map a route toward stigma change in dementia for use in a subsequent trial. Quantitative feasibility outcome assessments will be completed at baseline and after completion of the 15-week intervention while qualitative data will be collected at recruitment, baseline, during and post-intervention delivery. CONCLUSION: This feasibility study will provide evidence regarding the feasibility and acceptability of a comprehensive multifaceted psychosocial intervention programme for people with dementia and their caregivers (CREST). The results will be used to inform the development and implementation of a subsequent RCT, should the findings support feasibility. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN25294519 Retrospectively registered 07.10.2019.

Understanding breastfeeding behaviours: a cross-sectional analysis of associated factors in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Australia.

BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding is a complex behaviour relying on a combination of individual mother and infant characteristics, health systems, and family, community and professional support. Optimal breastfeeding in high-income countries is particularly low. Despite having similar sociocultural backgrounds, breastfeeding rates between Ireland, the United Kingdom (UK) and Australia vary, thus there is a need to understand whether this is due to individual, sociocultural or policy differences. This research identifies the between-country differences in infant feeding mode and examines if country differences in feeding mode persist once known individual, behavioural and structural factors are considered using socioecological and person-context models. METHODS: Participants were adult women with at least one infant less than 6 months of age, who completed an online survey (n = 2047) that was distributed by social media in June 2016. Within-country differences in infant feeding mode ('any breastfeeding' vs. 'no breastfeeding') were examined first before hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was used to determine if country differences in feeding mode persisted after adjusting for known factors associated with breastfeeding. RESULTS: In this sample, 'any breastfeeding' rates were 89, 71 and 72% in Australia, Ireland and the United Kingdom respectively. Within-country differences were evident in Australia, Ireland and the UK. Four factors showed no association with infant feeding mode in Australia while they did in the other countries (maternal age, income, skin-to-skin contact, support from friends and family). Two factors were unique to Australia: the odds of being in the 'no breastfeeding' group increased when the baby was delivered via caesarean and when not enough breastfeeding information was available after birth. One determinant was unique to Ireland: the odds of being in the 'no breastfeeding' group increased when respondents indicated they were not religious; in the UK this occurred when respondents were living in a town/village. After adjusting for sets of known factors of infant feeding mode based on socioecological and person-context models, country differences remained in hierarchical regressions: the odds of not breastfeeding were higher in both Ireland (AOR 3.3, 95%CI 1.8,6.1) and the United Kingdom (AOR 2.7, 95%CI 1.5, 4.7) compared to Australia. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that different levels in the socioecological system are related to infant feeding behaviours. An adequate inter-systems level response would consider the interactions within and between behavioural and structural mechanisms which support breastfeeding behaviour. Optimising infant feeding practices will require an integrated web of interventions that go beyond the individual and focus on addressing factors that will influence families within their communities as they move between systems.

Blue care: a systematic review of blue space interventions for health and wellbeing.

There is increasing interest in the potential use of outdoor water environments, or blue space, in the promotion of human health and wellbeing. However, therapeutic nature-based practices are currently outpacing policy and the evidence base for health or wellbeing benefits of therapeutic interventions within blue space has not been systematically assessed. This systematic review aims to address the gap in understanding the impacts of blue space within existing interventions for targeted individuals. A systematic review was carried out, searching Google Scholar, SCOPUS, PubMed, etc. through to August 2017. Only blue space interventions were included that were specifically designed and structured with a therapeutic purpose for individuals with a defined need and did not include nature-based promotion projects or casual recreation in the outdoors. Thirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria and were assessed. Overall, the studies suggest that blue care can have direct benefit for health, especially mental health and psycho-social wellbeing. The majority of papers found a positive or weak association between blue care and health and wellbeing indicators. There was also some evidence for greater social connectedness during and after interventions, but results were inconsistent and mixed across studies with very few findings for physical health. This is the first systematic review of the literature on blue care. In summary, it has been shown that mental health, especially psycho-social wellbeing, can be improved with investment in blue spaces. Key areas for future research include improving understanding of the mechanisms through which blue care can improve public health promotion.

The cost effectiveness of the SIMPle intervention to improve antimicrobial prescribing for urinary tract infection in primary care.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance is a major public health issue. This study examines the cost effectiveness of the SIMPle (Supporting the Improvement and Management of Prescribing for Urinary Tract Infections (UTI)) intervention to improve antimicrobial prescribing in primary care in Ireland. Methods: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a cluster randomized controlled trial of 30 general practices and 2560 patients with a diagnosis of UTI. Practices were randomized to the usual practice control or the SIMPle intervention (arm A or B). Data at 6 months follow-up were used to estimate incremental costs, incremental effectiveness in terms of first-line antimicrobial prescribing for UTI and cost effectiveness acceptability curves. Results: The SIMPle intervention was, on average, more costly and more effective than the control. The probability of intervention arm A being cost effective was 0.280, 0.995 and 1.000 at threshold values of €50, €150 and €250 per percentage point increase in first-line antimicrobial prescribing respectively. The equivalent probabilities for intervention arm B were 0.121, 0.863 and 0.985, respectively. Conclusions: The cost effectiveness of the SIMPle intervention depends on the value placed on improving antimicrobial prescribing. Future studies should examine the wider and longer term costs and outcomes of improving antimicrobial prescribing.

Using qualitative insights to change practice: exploring the culture of antibiotic prescribing and consumption for urinary tract infections.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to explore the culture of antibiotic prescribing and consumption in the community for urinary tract infections (UTI) from the perspective of the general practitioners (GPs) and community member. DESIGN: Indepth interviews were conducted with GPs, and focus groups were held with community members. SETTING: General practice and community setting. PARTICIPANTS: 15 GPs practising in rural and urban locations in Ireland participated in the indepth interviews. 6 focus groups (n=42) with participants who had direct or indirect experiences with UTI were also undertaken. RESULTS: The decision to prescribe or consume an antibiotic for a UTI is a set of complex processes including need recognition, information search and evaluation processes governed by the relationship and interactions between the GP and the patient. Different GP and patient decision-making profiles emerged emphasising the diversity and variety of general practice in real-life settings. The GP findings showed a requirement for more microbiological information on antibiotic resistance patterns to inform prescribing decisions. Focus group participants wanted a conversation with the GP about their illness and the treatment options available. CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, this research identified the consultation as a priority intervention environment for stimulating change in relation to antibiotics. This paper demonstrates how qualitative research can identify the interacting processes which are instrumental to the decision to prescribe or consume an antibiotic for a suspected UTI. Qualitative research empowers researchers to investigate the what, how and why of interventions in real-life setting. Qualitative research can play a critical and instrumental role in designing behavioural change strategies with high impact on practice. The results of this research were used to design a complex intervention informed by social marketing. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01913860; Pre-results.

Intervention to improve the quality of antimicrobial prescribing for urinary tract infection: a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Overuse of antimicrobial therapy in the community adds to the global spread of antimicrobial resistance, which is jeopardizing the treatment of common infections. METHODS: We designed a cluster randomized complex intervention to improve antimicrobial prescribing for urinary tract infection in Irish general practice. During a 3-month baseline period, all practices received a workshop to promote consultation coding for urinary tract infections. Practices in intervention arms A and B received a second workshop with information on antimicrobial prescribing guidelines and a practice audit report (baseline data). Practices in intervention arm B received additional evidence on delayed prescribing of antimicrobials for suspected urinary tract infection. A reminder integrated into the patient management software suggested first-line treatment and, for practices in arm B, delayed prescribing. Over the 6-month intervention, practices in arms A and B received monthly audit reports of antimicrobial prescribing. RESULTS: The proportion of antimicrobial prescribing according to guidelines for urinary tract infection increased in arms A and B relative to control (adjusted overall odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7 to 3.2; arm A adjusted OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.8 to 4.1; arm B adjusted OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.0). An unintended increase in antimicrobial prescribing was observed in the intervention arms relative to control (arm A adjusted OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.0; arm B adjusted OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.9 to 2.1). Improvements in guideline-based prescribing were sustained at 5 months after the intervention. INTERPRETATION: A complex intervention, including audit reports and reminders, improved the quality of prescribing for urinary tract infection in Irish general practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01913860.

Supporting the improvement and management of prescribing for urinary tract infections (SIMPle): protocol for a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The overuse of antimicrobials is recognized as the main selective pressure driving the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance in human bacterial pathogens. Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are among the most common infections presented in primary care and empirical antimicrobial treatment is currently recommended. Previous research has identified that a substantial proportion of Irish general practitioners (GPs) prescribe antimicrobials for UTIs that are not in accordance with the Guidelines for Antimicrobial Prescribing in Primary Care in Ireland. The aim of this trial is to design, implement and evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention on GP antimicrobial prescribing and adult (18 years of age and over) patients' antimicrobial consumption when presenting with a suspected UTI. METHODS/DESIGN: The Supporting the Improvement and Management of Prescribing for urinary tract infections (SIMPle) study is a three-armed intervention with practice-level randomization. Adult patients presenting with suspected UTIs in primary care will be included in the study.The intervention integrates components for both GPs and patients. For GPs the intervention includes interactive workshops, audit and feedback reports and automated electronic prompts summarizing recommended first-line antimicrobial treatment and, for one intervention arm, a recommendation to consider delayed antimicrobial treatment. For patients, multimedia applications and information leaflets are included. Thirty practices will be recruited to the study; laboratory data indicate that 2,038 patients will be prescribed an antimicrobial in the study. The primary outcome is a change in prescribing of first-line antimicrobials for UTIs in accordance with the Guidelines for Antimicrobial Prescribing in Primary Care in Ireland. The study will take place over 15 months with a six-month intervention period. Data will be collected through a remote electronic anonymized data-extraction system, a text-messaging system and GP and patient interviews and surveys. The intervention will be strengthened by the implementation of a social marketing framework and an economic evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This intervention is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID NCT01913860.