Search

Copyright of European Journal of Social Work is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Document Reviewers: Luis Alcocer (Mexico), Christina Antza (Greece), Mustafa Arici (Turkey), Eduardo Barbosa (Brazil), Adel Berbari (Lebanon), Luís Bronze (Portugal), John Chalmers (Australia), Tine De Backer (Belgium), Alejandro de la Sierra (Spain), Kyriakos Dimitriadis (Greece), Dorota Drozdz (Poland), Béatrice Duly-Bouhanick (France), Brent M. Egan (USA), Serap Erdine (Turkey), Claudio Ferri (Italy), Slavomira Filipova (Slovak Republic), Anthony Heagerty (UK), Michael Hecht Olsen (Denmark), Dagmara Hering (Poland), Sang Hyun Ihm (South Korea), Uday Jadhav (India), Manolis Kallistratos (Greece), Kazuomi Kario (Japan), Vasilios Kotsis (Greece), Adi Leiba (Israel), Patricio López-Jaramillo (Colombia), Hans-Peter Marti (Norway), Terry McCormack (UK), Paolo Mulatero (Italy), Dike B. Ojji (Nigeria), Sungha Park (South Korea), Priit Pauklin (Estonia), Sabine Perl (Austria), Arman Postadzhian (Bulgaria), Aleksander Prejbisz (Poland), Venkata Ram (India), Ramiro Sanchez (Argentina), Markus Schlaich (Australia), Alta Schutte (Australia), Cristina Sierra (Spain), Sekib Sokolovic (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Jonas Spaak (Sweden), Dimitrios Terentes-Printzios (Greece), Bruno Trimarco (Italy), Thomas Unger (The Netherlands), Bert-Jan van den Born (The Netherlands), Anna Vachulova (Slovak Republic), Agostino Virdis (Italy), Jiguang Wang (China), Ulrich Wenzel (Germany), Paul Whelton (USA), Jiri Widimsky (Czech Republic), Jacek Wolf (Poland), Grégoire Wuerzner (Switzerland), Eugene Yang (USA), Yuqing Zhang (China)., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background/objectives: Sedentary behavior (SB), defined as sitting (nonexercising), reclining, and lying down (posture), or by low energy expenditure, is a public health risk independent to physical activity. The objective of this systematic literature review was to synthesize the available evidence on amount of SB reported by and measured in older adults. Data source: Studies published between 1981 and 2014 were identified from electronic databases and manual searching. Large-scale population studies/surveys reporting the amount of SB (objective/ subjective) in older adults aged ≥ 60 years of age were included. Appraisal and synthesis was completed using MOOSE guidelines. Results: 349,698 adults aged ≥ 60 within 22 studies (10 countries and 1 EU-wide) were included. Objective measurement of SB shows that older adults spend an average of 9.4 hr a day sedentary, equating to 65-80% of their waking day. Self-report of SB is lower, with average weighted self-reports being 5.3 hr daily. Within specific domains of SB, older adults report 3.3 hr in leisure sitting time and 3.3 hr watching TV. There is an association with more time spent in SB as age advances and a trend for older men to spend more time in SB than women. Conclusion/ implications: Time spent sedentary ranges from 5.3-9.4 hr per waking day in older adults. With recent studies suggesting a link between SB, health, and well-being, independent of physical activity, this is an area important for successful aging. Limitations: Different methodologies of measurement and different reporting methods of SB made synthesis difficult. Estimated SB time from self-report is half of that measured objectively; suggesting that most self-report surveys of SB will vastly underestimate the actual time spent in SB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Sarcoma Policy Checklist was created by a multidisciplinary expert group to provide policymakers with priority areas to improve care for sarcoma patients.Main Body: This paper draws on this research, by looking more closely at how France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom are addressing each of these priority areas. It aims to highlight key gaps in research, policy and practice, as well as ongoing initiatives that may impact the future care of sarcoma patients in different European countries. A pragmatic review of the published and web-based literature was undertaken. Telephone interviews were conducted in each country with clinical and patient experts to substantiate findings. Research findings were discussed within the expert group and developed into five core policy recommendations. The five identified priority areas were: the development of designated and accredited centres of reference; more professional training; multidisciplinary care; greater incentives for research and innovation; and more rapid access to effective treatments. Most of the countries studied have ongoing initiatives addressing many of these priorities; however, many are in early stages of development, or require additional funding and resources.Conclusion: Gaps in access to quality care are particularly concerning in many of Europe's lower-resourced countries. Equitable access to information, clinical trials, innovative treatments and quality specialist care should be available to all sarcoma patients. Achieving this across Europe will require close collaboration between all stakeholders at both the national and European level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Verbal interaction has been the subject of a growing interest among language professionals in Europe since the CEFR was published in 2001; in linguistics, verbal interaction has long been studied. In the Bakhtinian approach, it is even considered "the fundamental reality of language". All types of interaction share the fact that they are dynamically co-constructed by participants. How then can we assess or certify interactional competence on an individual basis when dynamic instability prevails? What criteria can be defined in order to deconstruct interactional competence into specific operational criteria, if interaction is intrinsically multidimensional? These are the questions that we address in this paper. To do so, this paper presents the insights gained as a result of the co-operation between two certification systems: CertAcles (Spain) and CLES (France), both belonging to NULTE ("Network of University Language Testers in Europe"). These certification systems have agreed to collaborate extensively, sharing their constructs and assessment routines. As a result, CertAcles is shifting towards more contextualized tasks and CLES is considering adopting descriptive assessment scales for interaction (C1 level). We hope to demonstrate that the materialization of scientific collaboration of this kind can help improve individual systems.

Background The European Union has used Healthy Life Years (HLY) as an indicator to monitor the health of its aging populations. Scholarly and popular interest in HLY across countries has grown, particularly regarding the ranking of countries. It is important to note that HLY is based on self-assessments of activity limitations, raising the possibility that it might be influenced by differences in health reporting behaviours between populations, a phenomenon known as differential item functioning (DIF). Methods We estimated DIF-adjusted HLY at age 50 for Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden to determine the extent to which differences in HLY might be influenced by reporting heterogeneity across countries. We used anchoring vignettes, taken from the 2004 Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe, to estimate DIF-adjusted prevalence rates of activity limitations measured by the Global Activity Limitations Indicator (GALI). The Sullivan method was used to calculate DIF-adjusted HLY. Results Changes in HLY before and after adjustment ranged from a 1.20-year decrease for men in Italy to a 1.61-year increase for women in Spain. Adjustment for DIF produced changes in the rankings of the countries by HLY, with upward and downward movements of up to three positions. Conclusion Our results show that DIF is likely to affect HLY estimates, thereby posing a challenge to the validity of comparisons of HLY across European countries. The findings suggest that HLY should be used to monitor population health status within a country, rather than to make comparisons across countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Local wound infections are a major challenge for patients and health professionals. Various diagnostic and therapeutic options are available. However, a generally accepted standard is still lacking in Europe. The aim was to develop an easy-to-use clinical score for the early detection of local wound infections, as a basis for decisionmaking on antiseptic therapy or decolonisation. Method: An interdisciplinary and interprofessional panel of experts from seven European countries was brought together to discuss the various aspects of diagnosing local wound infections. Results: The result was the adoption of the Therapeutic Index for Local Infections (TILI) score, developed in Germany by Initiative Chronische Wunden e.V., specifically for health professionals not specialised in wound care. Available in six European languages, the TILI score could also be adapted for different European countries, depending on their specific national healthcare requirements. The six clinical criteria for local wound infection are erythema to surrounding skin; heat; oedema, induration or swelling; spontaneous pain or pressure pain; stalled wound healing; and increase and/or change in colour or smell of exudate. Meeting all criteria indicates that antiseptic wound therapy could be started. Regardless of these unspecific clinical signs, there are also health conditions for the clinical situation which are a direct indication for antimicrobial wound therapy. These include the presence of wound pathogens, such as meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, septic surgical wound or the presence of free pus. Conclusion: The development of the new internationally adapted TILI score, which could also be used by any caregiver in daily practice to diagnose local infections in acute and hard-to-heal wounds, is the result of expert consensus. However, the score system has to be validated through a clinical evaluation. This is to be performed in expert centres throughout Europe. Declaration of interest: JD has received research support, lecture fees and travel-cost reimbursements from 4M, Coloplast, Convatec, Draco, Engelhardt, Paul Hartmann, KCI, Lohmann&Rauscher, Mölnlycke, SastoMed and Urgo. RL has received research support, lecture fees and travel-cost reimbursements from Mölnlycke and Urgo. AK has received research support, lecture fees and travel-cost reimbursements from 3M, B. Braun Melsungen, Bode/Paul Hartmann, Ethicon, Lohmann&Rauscher, Mundipharma, Oculus, SastoMed Schülke&Mayr, SERAG-WIESSNER and Urgo. JVS has received research support, lecture fees and travel-cost reimbursements from Mundipharma, Histocell, Quesper and Urgo. This work was supported by an unlimited grant from Urgo Medical. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Urgo Medical. The company had no direct influence on the content of this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]