Search results

Objective: This systematic review aims to identify and explore the experiences and views regarding secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure among women and children in the home, workplace, school, personal vehicles, and public places from the perspectives of (i) women, (ii) children and (iii) professionals in Middle Eastern countries.Introduction: Exposure to SHS is a significant public health problem globally, particularly Middle Eastern countries. Whilst many Middle Eastern countries have implemented tobacco control programs and have legislation that bans smoking in public places, the legislation is not always comprehensively implemented or enforced. Therefore, women and children continue to be exposed to SHS in public and private settings. Inclusion criteria: This review will consider studies that include the views and experiences of any of the following three groups: (i) women (including pregnant women and mothers), (ii) children (primary and secondary school age), and (iii) professionals (including health professionals and policy makers), regarding the prevention of SHS exposure in women and children in Middle Eastern countries. Methods: Six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Scopus) and three sources of grey literature will be searched for eligible studies. Databases will be searched from their inception dates and no language restrictions will be applied. Two reviewers will independently screen studies, extract data and assess methodological quality of included studies, following JBI systematic review guidelines. The JBI process of meta-aggregation will be used to identify categories and synthesize findings. The ConQual approach will be used to assess confidence in the findings.

Abstract Background UK NHS Stop Smoking Services provide cost effective smoking cessation interventions but, as yet, there has been no assessment of their provision of relapse prevention interventions. Methods Electronic questionnaire survey of 185 UK Stop Smoking Services Managers. Results Ninety six Stop Smoking Service managers returned completed questionnaires (52% response rate). Of these, 58.3% (n = 56) ran NHS Stop Smoking Services which provided relapse prevention interventions for clients with the most commonly provided interventions being behavioural support: telephone (77%), group (73%), and individual (54%). Just under half (48%, n = 27) offered nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), 21.4% (n = 12) bupropion; 19.6% (n = 11) varenicline. Over 80% of those providing relapse prevention interventions do so for over six months. Nearly two thirds of all respondents thought it was likely that they would either continue to provide or commence provision of relapse prevention interventions in their services. Of the remaining respondents, 66.7% (n = 22) believed that the government focus on four-week quit rates, and 42.9% (14 services) believed that inadequate funding for provision of relapse prevention interventions, were major barriers to introducing these interventions into routine care. Conclusions Just over half of UK managers of NHS Stop Smoking Services who responded to the questionnaire reported that, in their services, relapse prevention interventions were currently provided for clients, despite, at that time, there being a weak evidence base for their effectiveness. The most commonly provided relapse prevention interventions were those for which there was least evidence. If these interventions are found to be effective, barriers would need to be removed before they would become part of routine care.

Background UK NHS Stop Smoking Services provide cost effective smoking cessation interventions but, as yet, there has been no assessment of their provision of relapse prevention interventions. Methods Electronic questionnaire survey of 185 UK Stop Smoking Services Managers. Results Ninety six Stop Smoking Service managers returned completed questionnaires (52% response rate). Of these, 58.3% (n = 56) ran NHS Stop Smoking Services which provided relapse prevention interventions for clients with the most commonly provided interventions being behavioural support: telephone (77%), group (73%), and individual (54%). Just under half (48%, n = 27) offered nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), 21.4% (n = 12) bupropion; 19.6% (n = 11) varenicline. Over 80% of those providing relapse prevention interventions do so for over six months. Nearly two thirds of all respondents thought it was likely that they would either continue to provide or commence provision of relapse prevention interventions in their services. Of the remaining respondents, 66.7% (n = 22) believed that the government focus on four-week quit rates, and 42.9% (14 services) believed that inadequate funding for provision of relapse prevention interventions, were major barriers to introducing these interventions into routine care. Conclusions Just over half of UK managers of NHS Stop Smoking Services who responded to the questionnaire reported that, in their services, relapse prevention interventions were currently provided for clients, despite, at that time, there being a weak evidence base for their effectiveness. The most commonly provided relapse prevention interventions were those for which there was least evidence. If these interventions are found to be effective, barriers would need to be removed before they would become part of routine care.

Abstract
Background
Conflict situations, armed or not, have been associated with emergence and transmission of infectious diseases. This review aims to identify the pathways through which infectious diseases emerge within conflict situations and to outline appropriate infectious disease preparedness and response strategies.

Methods
A systematic review was performed representing published evidence from January 2000 to October 2023. Ovid Medline and Embase were utilised to obtain literature on infectious diseases in any conflict settings. The systematic review adhered to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis). No geographical restrictions were imposed.

Findings
Our review identified 51 studies covering AIDS, Hepatitis B, Tuberculosis, Cholera, Coronavirus 2, Ebola, Poliomyelitis, Malaria, Leishmaniasis, Measles, Diphtheria, Dengue and Acute Bacterial Meningitis within conflict settings in Europe, Middle East, Asia, and Africa since October 2023. Key factors contributing to disease emergence and transmission in conflict situations included population displacement, destruction of vital infrastructure, reduction in functioning healthcare systems and healthcare personnel, disruption of disease control programmes (including reduced surveillance, diagnostic delays, and interrupted vaccinations), reduced access by healthcare providers to populations within areas of active conflict, increased population vulnerability due to limited access to healthcare services, and disruptions in the supply chain of safe water, food, and medication. To mitigate these infectious disease risks reported preparedness and response strategies included both disease-specific intervention strategies as well as broader concepts such as the education of conflict-affected populations through infectious disease awareness programmes, investing in and enabling health care in locations with displaced populations, intensifying immunisation campaigns, and ensuring political commitment and intersectoral collaborations between governments and international organisations.

Conclusion
Conflict plays a direct and indirect role in the transmission and propagation of infectious diseases. The findings from this review can assist decision-makers in the development of evidence-based preparedness and response strategies for the timely and effective containment of infectious disease outbreaks in conflict zones and amongst conflict-driven displaced populations.

Funding
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control under specific contract No. 22 ECD.13,154 within Framework contract ECDC/2019/001 Lot 1B.