Search

Environmental justice advocates often argue that environmental hazards and their health effects vary by neighborhood, income, and race. To assess these patterns and advance preventive policy, their colleagues in the research world often use complex and methodologically sophisticated statistical and geospatial techniques. One way to bridge the gap between the technical work and the expert knowledge of local residents is through community-based participatory research strategies. We document how an environmental justice screening method was coupled with "ground-truthing"--a project in which community members worked with researchers to collect data across six Los Angeles neighborhoods--which demonstrated the clustering of potentially hazardous facilities, high levels of air pollution, and elevated health risks. We discuss recommendations and implications for future research and collaborations between researchers and community-based organizations.

Background: Perioperative nutrition support is recommended for patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer surgery; however, limited evidence exists regarding implementation of a nutrition care pathway in clinical practice. The aims of this pilot study were to determine whether implementation of a standardised perioperative nutrition pathway for patients undergoing UGI cancer surgery improves access to dietetics care, as well as to evaluate study feasibility, fidelity, resource requirements and effect on clinical outcomes. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed UGI cancer from four major metropolitan hospitals in Melbourne, planned for curative intent surgery, were included in the prospective pilot study (n = 35), with historical controls (n = 35) as standard care. Outcomes were dietetics care (dietetics contacts) nutritional status, hand grip strength, weight change, preoperative hospital admissions, complications and length of stay, recruitment feasibility, fidelity and adherence, and resource requirements. Continuous data were analysed using independent samples t test accounting for unequal variances or a Mann–Whitney U test. Dichotomous data were analysed using Fisher's exact test. Results: The percentage of participants receiving preoperative dietetic intervention increased from 55% to 100% (p < 0.001). Mean ± SD dietetics contacts increased from 2.2 ± 3.7 to 5.9 ± 3.9 (p < 0.001). Non‐statistically significant decreases in preoperative nutrition‐related hospital admissions, and surgical complications were demonstrated in patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Recruitment rate was 81%, and adherence to the nutrition pathway was high (> 70% for all stages of the pathway). The mean ± SD estimated resource requirement for the preoperative period was 3.7 ± 2.8 h per patient. Conclusions: Implementation of this standardised nutrition pathway resulted in improved access to dietetics care. Recruitment feasibility and high fidelity to the intervention suggest that a larger study would be viable. Key points: This was a multisite pilot study investigating the implementation of a standardised perioperative nutrition pathway for patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery compared to standard care. Thirty‐five patients were included in the study and were compared with 35 historical controls. The percentage of participants receiving preoperative dietetic intervention increased from 55% to 100% (p < 0.001). Mean ± SD dietetics contacts increased from 2.2 ± 3.7 to 5.9 ± 3.9 (p < 0.001). The recruitment rate was 81%, and adherence to the nutrition pathway was > 70% for all stages of the pathway. Larger prospective studies are required to investigate optimal standardised methods of nutrition support in this patient group. This pilot study demonstrated that a larger trial would be feasible to implement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The present study aimed to investigate health service nutrition practices of sites providing care to patients undergoing surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer within Australia, including the provision of perioperative nutrition support services and outpatient clinics, as well as the use of evidence‐based nutrition care pathways/protocols. Secondary aims were to investigate associations between the use of a nutrition care pathway/protocol and patient outcomes. Methods: Principal investigator dietitians for the sites (n = 27) participating in the NOURISH point prevalence study participated in a purpose‐built site‐specific survey regarding perioperative nutrition practices and protocols. Data from the 200 patients who participated in the study (including malnutrition prevalence, preoperative weight loss and receipt of dietetics intervention, intraoperative feeding tube insertions, provision of nutrition support day 1 post surgery, length of stay, and complications) were investigated using multivariate analysis to determine associations with the sites' use of a nutrition care pathway/protocol. Results: The majority of sites (>92%) reported having dietetics services available in chemotherapy/radiotherapy. Eighty‐five percent of sites reported having some form of outpatient clinic service; however, a routine service was only available at 26% of sites preoperatively and 37% postoperatively. Most preoperative services were embedded into surgical/oncology clinics (70%); however, this was reported for only 44% of postoperative clinics. Only 44% had a nutrition care pathway/protocol in place. The use of a nutrition care pathway/protocol was associated with lower rates of malnutrition, as well as higher rates of preoperative dietetics intervention, intraoperative feeding tube insertions, and European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) guideline compliant care day 1 post surgery. Conclusions: The results of the present study demonstrate varied perioperative outpatient nutrition services in this high‐risk patient group. The use of nutrition care pathways and protocols was associated with improved patient outcomes. Key points: Perioperative nutrition support is strongly recommended for patients undergoing surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer. However, the level of perioperative nutrition services in Australia including the use of outpatient clinics and nutrition care pathways is currently unknown. Data from the 27 hospitals, and the 200 patients who participated in the NOURISH point prevalence study was analysed to report on health service nutrition practices in UGI cancer resection, and associations with patient outcomes. Results demonstrated inconsistent nutrition support practices, with 44% of sites having an evidence‐based nutrition care pathway/protocol in place. The use of a nutrition care pathway/protocol was associated with lower rates of malnutrition, and higher rates of preoperative dietetics intervention, intraoperative feeding tube insertions and ESPEN guideline compliant nutrition care day one post surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Identification and treatment of malnutrition are essential in upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. However, there is limited understanding of the nutritional status of UGI cancer patients at the time of curative surgery. This prospective point prevalence study involving 27 Australian tertiary hospitals investigated nutritional status at the time of curative UGI cancer resection, as well as presence of preoperative nutrition impact symptoms, and associations with length of stay (LOS) and surgical complications. Methods: Subjective global assessment, hand grip strength (HGS) and weight were performed within 7 days of admission. Data on preoperative weight changes, nutrition impact symptoms, and dietary intake were collected using a purpose-built data collection tool. Surgical LOS and complications were also recorded. Multivariate regression models were developed for nutritional status, unintentional weight loss, LOS and complications. Results: This study included 200 patients undergoing oesophageal, gastric and pancreatic surgery. Malnutrition prevalence was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI) 35%, 49%), 49% lost ≥5% weight in 6 months, and 47% of those who completed HGS assessment had low muscle strength with no differences between surgical procedures (p = 0.864, p = 0.943, p = 0.075, respectively). The overall prevalence of reporting at least one preoperative nutrition impact symptom was 55%, with poor appetite (37%) and early satiety (23%) the most frequently reported. Age (odds ratio (OR) 4.1, 95% CI 1.5, 11.5, p = 0.008), unintentional weight loss of ≥5% in 6 months (OR 28.7, 95% CI 10.5, 78.6, p < 0.001), vomiting (OR 17.1, 95% CI 1.4, 207.8, 0.025), reduced food intake lasting 2–4 weeks (OR 7.4, 95% CI 1.3, 43.5, p = 0.026) and ≥1 month (OR 7.7, 95% CI 2.7, 22.0, p < 0.001) were independently associated with preoperative malnutrition. Factors independently associated with unintentional weight loss were poor appetite (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6, 8.4, p = 0.002) and degree of solid food reduction of <75% (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2, 9.2, p = 0.02) and <50% (OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.5, 15.6, p = 0.008) of usual intake. Malnutrition (regression coefficient 3.6, 95% CI 0.1, 7.2, p = 0.048) and unintentional weight loss (regression coefficient 4.1, 95% CI 0.5, 7.6, p = 0.026) were independently associated with LOS, but no associations were found for complications. Conclusions: Despite increasing recognition of the importance of preoperative nutritional intervention, a high proportion of patients present with malnutrition or clinically significant weight loss, which are associated with increased LOS. Factors associated with malnutrition and weight loss should be incorporated into routine preoperative screening. Further investigation is required of current practice for dietetics interventions received prior to UGI surgery and if this mitigates the impact on clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Preoperative nutrition intervention is recommended prior to upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer resection; however, there is limited understanding of interventions received in current clinical practice. This study investigated type and frequency of preoperative dietetics intervention and nutrition support received and clinical and demographic factors associated with receipt of intervention. Associations between intervention and preoperative weight loss, surgical length of stay (LOS), and complications were also investigated. Methods: The NOURISH Point Prevalence Study was conducted between September 2019 and May 2020 across 27 Australian tertiary centres. Subjective global assessment and weight were performed within 7 days of admission. Patients reported on preoperative dietetics and nutrition intervention, and surgical LOS and complications were recorded. Results: Two-hundred patients participated (59% male, mean (standard deviation) age 67 (10)). Sixty percent had seen a dietitian preoperatively, whilst 50% were receiving nutrition support (92% oral nutrition support (ONS)). Patients undergoing pancreatic surgery were less likely to receive dietetics intervention and nutrition support than oesophageal or gastric surgeries (p < 0.001 and p = 0.029, respectively). Neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.003) and malnutrition (p = 0.046) remained independently associated with receiving dietetics intervention; however, 31.3% of malnourished patients had not seen a dietitian. Patients who received ≥3 dietetics appointments had lower mean (SD) percentage weight loss at the 1-month preoperative timeframe compared with patients who received 0–2 appointments (1.2 (2.0) vs. 3.1 (3.3), p = 0.001). Patients who received ONS for >2 weeks had lower mean (SD) percentage weight loss than those who did not (1.2 (1.8) vs. 2.9 (3.4), p = 0.001). In malnourished patients, total dietetics appointments ≥3 was independently associated with reduced surgical complications (odds ratio 0.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1, 0.9, p = 0.04), and ONS >2 weeks was associated with reduced LOS (regression coefficient −7.3, 95% CI −14.3, −0.3, p = 0.04). Conclusions: Despite recommendations, there are low rates of preoperative dietetics consultation and nutrition support in this population, which are associated with increased preoperative weight loss and risk of increased LOS and complications in malnourished patients. The results of this study provide insights into evidence–practice gaps for improvement and data to support further research regarding optimal methods of preoperative nutrition support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A cross-sectional survey among participants in India and South Africa to explore perceptions and awareness of SARS-CoV-2-related risks. Main outcome measures-proportion of participants aware of SARS-CoV-2, and their perception of infection risks as it related to their views and perceptions on vaccination, i.e., using COVID-19 vaccine uptake as proxy for awareness level. Self-administered questionnaires were used to collect data via web- and paper-based surveys over three months. Pearson's Chi-squared test assessed relationships between variables; a p-value less than 0.05 was considered significant. There were 844 respondents (India: n = 660, South Africa: n = 184; response rate 87.6%), with a 61.1% vs 38.3% female to male ratio. Post-high-school or university education was the lowest qualification reported by most respondents in India (77.3%) and South Africa (79.3%). Sources of pandemic information were usually media and journal publications (73.2%), social media (64.6%), family and friends (47.7%) and government websites (46.2%). Most respondents correctly identified infection prevention measures (such as physical distancing, mask use), with 90.0% reporting improved hand hygiene practices since the pandemic. Hesitancy or refusal to accept the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was reported among 17.9% and 50.9% of respondents in India and South Africa, respectively; reasons cited included rushed vaccine development and the futility of vaccines for what respondents considered a self-limiting flu-like illness. In South Africa, vaccine acceptance was associated with improved hand hygiene practices since the pandemic and flu vaccination in the preceding year. No relationship was noted between awareness and practice of infection prevention measures (such as hand hygiene) and socio-demographic factors such as employment status or availability of amenities. Pandemic response and infection prevention and control measures through vaccination campaigns should consider robust public engagement and contextually-fit communication strategies with multimodal, participatory online and offline initiatives to address public concerns, specifically towards vaccines developed for this pandemic and general vaccine hesitancy., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Mbamalu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: Nutritional intervention and prevention of malnutrition is significantly important for patients with upper gastrointestinal oesophageal, pancreatic and gastric cancer. However, there is limited information regarding nutritional status, and perioperative nutritional interventions that patients receive when undergoing curative surgery., Methods and Analysis: Patients diagnosed with upper gastrointestinal cancer, planned for curative intent resection across 27 Australian hospitals will be eligible to participate in this point prevalence study. The primary aim is to determine the prevalence of malnutrition in patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer at the time of surgery using subjective global assessment. Secondary aims are to determine the type and frequency of perioperative nutritional intervention received, the prevalence of clinically important weight loss and low muscle strength, and to investigate associations between the use of an evidence-based nutrition care pathway or protocol for the nutritional management of upper gastrointestinal surgical oncology patients and malnutrition prevalence. Data collection will be completed using a purpose-built data collection tool., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval was granted in May 2019 (LNR/51107/PMCC-2019). The design and reporting of this study comply with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist for reporting of observational cohort studies. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals and presented at relevant conferences. Results will assist in defining priority areas for research to improve patient outcomes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)