Search

Background: People experiencing homelessness co-occurring with substance use or offending ('severe and multiple disadvantage' SMD) often have high levels of poor oral health and related health behaviours (particularly, substance use, smoking, poor diet). This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions in adults experiencing SMD to improve oral health and related health behaviours. Methods and findings: From inception to February 2023, five bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus) and grey literature were searched. Two researchers independently screened the search results. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparative studies and economic evaluations were included that reported outcomes on oral health and the related health behaviours. Risk of bias was assessed and results narratively synthesized. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate. This review was registered with PROSPERO (reg. no: CRD42020202416). Thirty-eight studies were included (published between 1991 and 2023) with 34 studies reporting about effectiveness. Most studies reported on substance use (n = 30). Interventions with a combination of housing support with substance use and mental health support such as contingent work therapy appeared to show some reduction in substance use in SMD groups. However, meta-analyses showed no statistically significant results. Most studies had short periods of follow-up and high attrition rates. Only one study reported on oral health; none reported on diet. Three RCTs reported on smoking, of which one comprising nicotine replacement with contingency management showed improved smoking abstinence at 4 weeks compared to control. Five studies with economic evaluations provided some evidence that interventions such as Housing First and enhanced support could be cost-effective in reducing substance use. Conclusion: This review found that services such as housing combined with other healthcare services could be effective in improving health behaviours, particularly substance use, among SMD groups. Gaps in evidence also remain on oral health improvement, smoking, and diet. High quality studies on effectiveness with adequate power and retention are needed to address these significant health challenges in SMD populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The term 'care‐experienced' refers to anyone who is currently in care or has been in care at any stage in their life. A complex interplay of factors leads to care‐experienced children and young people (CECYP) experiencing poorer oral health and access to dental care than their peers. A rapid review of the co‐production of health and social care research with vulnerable children and young people (CYP) was carried out to inform the development of a co‐produced research project exploring the oral health behaviours and access to dental services of CECYP. Here, 'co‐production' refers to the involvement of CYP in the planning or conduct of research with explicit roles in which they generate ideas, evidence and research outputs. Aim: To learn how to meaningfully involve vulnerable CYP in the co‐production of health and social science research. Objectives: To identify: Different approaches to facilitating the engagement of vulnerable CYP in co‐production of health and social science research; different activities carried out in such approaches, challenges to engaging vulnerable CYP in co‐production of health and social science research and ways to overcome them and areas of best practice in relation to research co‐production with vulnerable CYP. Search Strategy: A rapid review of peer‐reviewed articles was conducted in six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, SocINDEX, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science) and grey literature to identify studies that engaged vulnerable CYP in co‐approaches to health and social research. Main Results: Of 1394 documents identified in the search, 40 were included and analysed. A number of different approaches to co‐production were used in the studies. The CYP was involved in a range of activities, chiefly the development of data collection tools, data collection and dissemination. Individual challenges for CYP and researchers, practical and institutional factors and ethical considerations impacted the success of co‐production. Discussion and Conclusion: Co‐production of health and social science with vulnerable CYP presents challenges to researchers and CYP calling for all to demonstrate reflexivity and awareness of biases, strengths and limitations. Used appropriately and well, co‐production offers benefits to researchers and CYP and can contribute to research that reflects the needs of vulnerable CYP. Adherence to the key principles of inclusion, safeguarding, respect and well‐being facilitates this approach. Patient and Public Contribution: Members of our patient and public involvement and stakeholder groups contributed to the interpretation of the review findings. This manuscript was written together with a young care leaver, Skye Boswell, who is one of the authors. She contributed to the preparation of the manuscript, reviewing the findings and their interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People experiencing homelessness have an increased risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, with rates higher than the general population. However, their access to HCV diagnosis is limited and treatment uptake is low. Objectives: To identify and describe the barriers and facilitators for HCV screening and treatment for adults with lived experience of homelessness in highly developed countries. Methods: Bibliographic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL and SocINDEX) and grey literature (Google, EThOS, the Health Foundation, Social Care Online, the World Health Organisation, Shelter, Crisis and Pathway) were searched. Two reviewers independently screened and appraised all studies. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist were used. The analysis involved a three‐stage process: coding, theme generation and theme mapping under Penchansky and Thomas's modified access model. Results: Twelve papers/reports were included in the review. Several interacting factors influence access of people with lived experience of homelessness to HCV testing and treatment. Some mirror those identified for the general population. The precarious conditions associated with the lived experience of homelessness along with the rigidity of hospital settings and lack of awareness emerged as dominant barriers. Flexibility, outreach, effective communication, tailoring and integration of services were found to be important facilitators. Evidence from Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups is limited. Conclusions: People experiencing homelessness face multiple barriers in accessing and completing HCV treatment, relating to both their lived experience and characteristics of health systems. Although some barriers are readily amenable to change, others are more difficult to modify. The facilitators identified could inform future targeted measures to improve HCV diagnosis and treatment for people experiencing homelessness. Research is warranted into successful models to promote screening, diagnosis and treatment. Patient or Public Contribution: Our team includes a peer advocate, a hepatology nurse and a community volunteer, all with significant experience in promoting and engaging in HCV care and outreach for people experiencing homelessness. They contributed to the protocol, interpretation and reporting of the review findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]