Making personalised nutrition the easy choice: Creating policies to break down the barriers and reap the benefits

Personalised diets based on people’s existing food choices, and/or phenotypic, and/or genetic information hold potential to improve public dietary-related health. The aim of this analysis, therefore, has been to examine the degree to which factors which determine uptake of personalised nutrition vary between EU countries to better target policies to encourage uptake, and optimise the health benefits of personalised nutrition technology. A questionnaire developed from previous qualitative research was used to survey nationally representative samples from 9 EU countries (N = 9381). Perceived barriers to the uptake of personalised nutrition comprised three factors (data protection; the eating context; and, societal acceptance). Trust in sources of information comprised four factors (commerce and media; practitioners; government; family and, friends). Benefits comprised a single factor. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was employed to compare differences in responses between the United Kingdom; Ireland; Portugal; Poland; Norway; the Netherlands; Germany; and, Spain. The results indicated that respondents in Greece, Poland, Ireland, Portugal and Spain, rated the benefits of personalised nutrition highest, suggesting a particular readiness in these countries to adopt personalised nutrition interventions. Greek participants were more likely to perceive the social context of eating as a barrier to adoption of personalised nutrition, implying a need for support in negotiating social situations while on a prescribed diet. Those in Spain, Germany, Portugal and Poland scored highest on perceived barriers related to data protection. Government was more trusted than commerce to deliver and provide information on personalised nutrition overall. This was particularly the case in Ireland, Portugal and Greece, indicating an imperative to build trust, particularly in the ability of commercial service providers to deliver personalised dietary regimes effectively in these countries. These findings, obtained from a nationally representative sample of EU citizens, imply that a parallel, integrated, public-private delivery system would capture the needs of most potential consumers.

Barriers and facilitators to cooking from 'scratch' using basic or raw ingredients: A qualitative interview study

Background: Previous research has highlighted an ambiguity in understanding cooking related terminology and a number of barriers and facilitators to home meal preparation. However, meals prepared in the home still include convenience products (typically high in sugars, fats and sodium) which can have negative effects on health. Therefore, this study aimed to qualitatively explore: (1) how individuals define cooking from ‘scratch’, and (2) their barriers and facilitators to cooking with basic ingredients.
Methods: 27 semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants (aged 18-58 years) living on the island of Ireland, eliciting definitions of ‘cooking from scratch’ and exploring the reasons participants cook in a particular way. The interviews were professionally transcribed verbatim and Nvivo 10 was used for an inductive thematic analysis.
Results: Our results highlighted that although cooking from ‘scratch’ lacks a single definition, participants viewed it as optimal cooking. Barriers to cooking with raw ingredients included: 1) time pressures; (2) desire to save money; (3) desire for effortless meals; (4) family food preferences; and (5) effect of kitchen disasters. Facilitators included: 1) desire to eat for health and well-being; (2) creative inspiration; (3) ability to plan and prepare meals ahead of time; and (4) greater self-efficacy in one’s cooking ability.
Conclusions: Our findings contribute to understanding how individuals define cooking from ‘scratch’, and barriers and facilitators to cooking with raw ingredients. Interventions should focus on practical sessions to increase cooking self-efficacy; highlight the importance of planning ahead and teach methods such as batch cooking and freezing to facilitate cooking from scratch.

Recruiting faith and non-faith based schools, adolescents and parents to a cluster randomised sexual-health trial: experiences, challenges and lessons from the mixed-methods Jack Feasibility Trial

Background: The move toward evidence-based education has led to increasing numbers of randomised trials in schools. However, the literature on recruitment to non-clinical trials is relatively underdeveloped, when compared to that of clinical trials. Recruitment to school-based randomised trials is, however, challenging; even more so when the focus of the study is a sensitive issue such as sexual health. This article reflects on the challenges of recruiting post-primary schools, adolescent pupils and parents to a cluster randomised feasibility trial of a sexual health intervention, and the strategies employed to address them.
Methods: The Jack Trial was funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). It comprised a feasibility study of an interactive film-based sexual health intervention entitled If I Were Jack, recruiting over 800 adolescents from eight socio-demographically diverse post-primary schools in Northern Ireland. It aimed to determine the facilitators and barriers to recruitment and retention to a school-based sexual health trial and identify optimal multi-level strategies for an effectiveness study. As part of an embedded process evaluation, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with principals, vice-principals, teachers, pupils and parents recruited to the study as well as classroom observations and a parents’ survey.
Results: With reference to Social Learning Theory, we identified a number of individual, behavioural and environmental level factors which influenced recruitment. Commonly identified facilitators included perceptions of the relevance and potential benefit of the intervention to adolescents, the credibility of the organisation and individuals running the study, support offered by trial staff, and financial incentives. Key barriers were prior commitment to other research, lack of time and resources, and perceptions that the intervention was incompatible with pupil or parent needs or the school ethos.
Conclusions: Reflecting on the methodological challenges of recruiting to a school-based sexual health feasibility trial, this study highlights pertinent general and trial-specific facilitators and barriers to recruitment, which will prove useful for future trials with schools, adolescent pupils and parents.

A process evaluation of a cluster randomised trial to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people in primary care (OPTI-SCRIPT study)

Background
The OPTI-SCRIPT cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) found that a three-phase multifaceted intervention including academic detailing with a pharmacist, GP-led medicines reviews, supported by web-based pharmaceutical treatment algorithms, and tailored patient information leaflets, was effective in reducing potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in Irish primary care. We report a process evaluation exploring the implementation of the intervention, the experiences of those participating in the study and lessons for future implementation.

Methods
The OPTI-SCRIPT trial included 21 GP practices and 196 patients. The process evaluation used mixed methods. Quantitative data were collected from all GP practices and semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs from intervention and control groups, and a purposive sample of patients from the intervention group. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis.

Results
Despite receiving a standardised academic detailing session, intervention delivery varied among GP practices. Just over 70 % of practices completed medicines review as recommended with the patient present. Only single-handed practices conducted reviews without patients present, highlighting the influence of practice characteristics and resources on variation. Medications were more likely to be completely stopped or switched to another more appropriate medication when reviews were conducted with patients present. The patient information leaflets were not used by any of the intervention practices. Both GP (32 %) and patient (40 %) recruitment rates were modest. For those who did participate, overall, the experience was positively viewed, with GPs and patients referring to the value of medication reviews to improve prescribing and reduce unnecessary medications. Lack of time in busy GP practices and remuneration were identified as organisational barriers to future implementation.

Conclusions
The OPTI-SCRIPT intervention was positively viewed by both GPs and patients, both of whom valued the study’s objectives. Patient information leaflets were not a successful component of the intervention. Academic detailing and medication reviews are important components in changing PIP, and having patients present during the review process seems to be a more effective approach for decreasing PIP.

The effectiveness of a nurse practitioner-led pain management team in long-term care: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND: Considering the high rates of pain as well as its under-management in long-term care (LTC) settings, research is needed to explore innovations in pain management that take into account limited resource realities. It has been suggested that nurse practitioners, working within an inter-professional model, could potentially address the under-management of pain in LTC.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effectiveness of implementing a nurse practitioner-led, inter-professional pain management team in LTC in improving (a) pain-related resident outcomes; (b) clinical practice behaviours (e.g., documentation of pain assessments, use of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions); and, (c) quality of pain medication prescribing practices.

METHODS: A mixed method design was used to evaluate a nurse practitioner-led pain management team, including both a quantitative and qualitative component. Using a controlled before-after study, six LTC homes were allocated to one of three groups: 1) a nurse practitioner-led pain team (full intervention); 2) nurse practitioner but no pain management team (partial intervention); or, 3) no nurse practitioner, no pain management team (control group). In total, 345 LTC residents were recruited to participate in the study; 139 residents for the full intervention group, 108 for the partial intervention group, and 98 residents for the control group. Data was collected in Canada from 2010 to 2012.

RESULTS: Implementing a nurse practitioner-led pain team in LTC significantly reduced residents' pain and improved functional status compared to usual care without access to a nurse practitioner. Positive changes in clinical practice behaviours (e.g., assessing pain, developing care plans related to pain management, documenting effectiveness of pain interventions) occurred over the intervention period for both the nurse practitioner-led pain team and nurse practitioner-only groups; these changes did not occur to the same extent, if at all, in the control group. Qualitative analysis highlighted the perceived benefits of LTC staff about having access to a nurse practitioner and benefits of the pain team, along with barriers to managing pain in LTC.

CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study showed that implementing a nurse practitioner-led pain team can significantly improve resident pain and functional status as well as clinical practice behaviours of LTC staff. LTC homes should employ a nurse practitioner, ideally located onsite as opposed to an offsite consultative role, to enhance inter-professional collaboration and facilitate more consistent and timely access to pain management.

A realist synthesis of educational interventions to improve nutrition care competencies and delivery by doctors and other healthcare professionals

Objective: To determine what, how, for whom, why, and in what circumstances educational interventions to improve the delivery of nutrition care by doctors and other healthcare professionals work?

Design: Realist synthesis following a published protocol and reported following Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) guidelines. A multidisciplinary team searched Medline, CINAHL, ERIC, EMBASE, PsyINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Science Direct for published and unpublished (grey) literature. The team identified studies with varied designs; appraised their ability to answer the review question; identified relationships between contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes (CMOs); and entered them into a spreadsheet configured for the purpose. The final synthesis identified commonalities across CMO configurations.

Results: Over half of the 46 studies from which we extracted data originated from the US. Interventions that improved the delivery of nutrition care improved skills and attitudes rather than just knowledge; provided opportunities for superiors to model nutrition care; removed barriers to nutrition care in health systems; provided participants with local, practically relevant tools and messages; and incorporated non-traditional, innovative teaching strategies. Operating in contexts where student and qualified healthcare professionals provided nutrition care in both developed and developing countries, these interventions yielded health outcomes by triggering a range of mechanisms, which included: feeling competent; feeling confident and comfortable; having greater self-efficacy; being less inhibited by barriers in healthcare systems; and feeling that nutrition care was accepted and recognised.

Conclusion: These findings show how important it is to move education for nutrition care beyond the simple acquisition of knowledge. They show how educational interventions embedded within systems of healthcare can improve patients’ health by helping health students and professionals to appreciate the importance of delivering nutrition care and feel competent to deliver it.