Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Fulltext A WHO-HPH operational program versus usual routines for implementing clinical health promotion: an RCT in health promoting hospitals (HPH)
    Svane JK, Chiou ST, Groene O, Kalvachova M, Brkić MZ, Fukuba I, et al.
    Implement Sci, 2018 12 22;13(1):153.
    PMID: 30577871 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-018-0848-0
    BACKGROUND: Implementation of clinical health promotion (CHP) aiming at better health gain is slow despite its effect. CHP focuses on potentially modifiable lifestyle risks such as smoking, alcohol, diet, and physical inactivity. An operational program was created to improve implementation. It included patients, staff, and the organization, and it combined existing standards, indicators, documentation models, a performance recognition process, and a fast-track implementation model. The aim of this study was to evaluate if the operational program improved implementation of CHP in clinical hospital departments, as measured by health status of patients and staff, frequency of CHP service delivery, and standards compliance.

    METHODS: Forty-eight hospital departments were recruited via open call and stratified by country. Departments were assigned to the operational program (intervention) or usual routine (control group). Data for analyses included 36 of these departments and their 5285 patients (median 147 per department; range 29-201), 2529 staff members (70; 10-393), 1750 medical records (50; 50-50), and standards compliance assessments. Follow-up was measured after 1 year. The outcomes were health status, service delivery, and standards compliance.

    RESULTS: No health differences between groups were found, but the intervention group had higher identification of lifestyle risk (81% versus 60%, p 

  2. Fulltext A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat
    Lazarus JV, Romero D, Kopka CJ, Karim SA, Abu-Raddad LJ, Almeida G, et al.
    Nature, 2022 Nov;611(7935):332-345.
    PMID: 36329272 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-05398-2
    Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.
Related Terms
    Try searching for something
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links