For-profit business safety interventions: A systematic, descriptive review of the literature

The purpose of this research was to determine if principles from organizational theory could be used as a framework to compare and contrast safety interventions developed by for-profit industry for the time period 1986–1996. A literature search of electronic databases and manual search of journals and local university libraries' book stacks was conducted for safety interventions developed by for-profit businesses. To maintain a constant regulatory environment, the business sectors of nuclear power, aviation and non-profits were excluded. Safety intervention evaluations were screened for scientific merit. Leavitt's model from organization theory was updated to include safety climate and renamed the Updated Leavitt's Model. In all, 8000 safety citations were retrieved, 525 met the inclusion criteria, 255 met the organizational safety intervention criteria, and 50 met the scientific merit criteria. Most came from non-public health journals. These 50 were categorized by the Updated Leavitt's Model according to where within the organizational structure the intervention took place. Evidence tables were constructed for descriptive comparison. The interventions clustered in the areas of social structure, safety climate, the interaction between social structure and participants, and the interaction between technology and participants. No interventions were found in the interactions between social structure and technology, goals and technology, or participants and goals. Despite the scientific merit criteria, many still had significant study design weaknesses. Five interventions tested for statistical significance but none of the interventions commented on the power of their study. Empiric studies based on safety climate theorems had the most rigorous designs. There was an attempt in these studies to address randomization amongst subjects to avoid bias. This work highlights the utility of using the Updated Leavitt's Model, a model from organizational theory, as a framework when comparing safety interventions. This work also highlights the need for better study design of future trials of safety interventions. ^

A systematic review of economic evaluations for interventions of cardiovascular diseases

Background. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) exhibits the most striking public health significance due to its high prevalence and mortality as well as huge economic burdens all over the world, especially in industrialized countries. Major risk factors of CVDs have been the targets of population-wide prevention in the United States. Economic evaluations provide structured information in regard to the efficiency of resource utilization which can inform decisions of resource allocation. The main purpose of this review is to investigate the pattern of study design of economic evaluations for interventions of CVDs. ^ Methods. Primary journal articles published during 2003-2008 were systematically retrieved via relevant keywords from Medline, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and EBSCO Academic Search Complete. Only full economic evaluations for narrowly defined CVD interventions were included for this review. The methodological data of interest were extracted from the eligible articles and reorganized in Microsoft Access database. Chi-square tests in SPSS were used to analyze the associations between pairs of categorical data. ^ Results. One hundred and twenty eligible articles were reviewed after two steps of literature selection with explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria. Descriptive statistics were reported regarding the evaluated interventions, outcome measures, unit costing and cost reports. The chi-square test of the association between prevention level of intervention and category of time horizon showed no statistical significance. The chi-square test showed that sponsor type was significantly associated with whether new or standard intervention being concluded as more cost effective. ^ Conclusions. Tertiary prevention and medication interventions are the major interests for economic evaluators. The majority of the evaluations were claimed from either a provider’s or a payer’s perspective. Almost all evaluations adopted gross costing strategy for unit cost data rather than micro costing. EQ-5D is the most commonly used instrument for subjective outcome measurement. More than half of the evaluations used decision analytic modeling techniques. The lack of consistency in study design standards in published evaluations appears in several aspects. Prevention level of intervention is not likely to be a factor for evaluators to decide whether to design an evaluation in a lifetime horizon or not. Published evaluations sponsored by industry are more likely to conclude that new intervention is more cost effective than standard intervention.^

The success of worksite nutrition and physical activity interventions with environmental modifications A systematic review

Background: As obesity increases among U.S. workers, employers are implementing programs to increase physical activity and improve diets. Although programs to address individual determinants of obesity have been evaluated, less is known about the effects of workplace programs that change environmental factors, because most reviews have not isolated environmental programs; the one that did was published in 2005. ^ Objective: To update the 2005 review to determine the effectiveness of workplace environmental interventions. ^ Methods: The Medline database was searched for published English language reports (2003-2011) of randomized controlled (RCTs) or quasi-experimental trials (NRCTs) that evaluated strategies to modify physical activity opportunities or food services, targeting employees at least 18 years, not including retirees and that provided data for at least one physical activity, dietary, or health risk indicator. Three coders independently extracted study characteristics and scored the quality of study methods. Program effectiveness was determined using the 2005 review's best evidence approach. ^ Results: Seven studies represented in nine reports met eligibility criteria; three focused on diet and the remainder targeted diet and physical activity interventions. All but one study received a high quality score for internal validity. The evidence for the effectiveness of workplace environmental interventions was at best, inconclusive for diet and physical activity and limited for health risk indicators. The outcome constructs were inconsistent across the studies. ^ Conclusions: Limitations in the methods of the 2005 review made it challenging to draw conclusions about findings for this review that include: variation in outcome measures, reliance on distal measures without proximal behavior change measures, no distinction between changes at the workplace versus outside the workplace, and inappropriate analyses of cluster designs that biased findings toward statistical significance. The best evidence approach relied on vote-counting, using statistical significance alone rather than effect size and confidence intervals. Future research should address these limitations and use more rigorous methods; systematic reviews should use methods of meta-analysis to summarize study findings. These recommendations will help employers to better understand how environmental modifications in the workplace can support their efforts to combat the effects of obesity among employees.^

Clinical trials, informed consent, & emergency medicine: A systematic literature review

Background: In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates clinical trials. These regulations address good clinical practices as well as human subject protection (FDA, 2012). One of the most important legal and ethical concerns in clinical trials is informed consent. 21 CFR 50 governs human subjects research. Part 50.24 provides an emergency research exception to the informed consent requirement. Research was conducted to determine the appropriateness of this exception, whether the benefit justifies the exception, and its public health significance.^ Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted and articles were identified from peer-reviewed journals.^ Results: There is some variance in opinions regarding the appropriateness of the exception, but the literature reviewed found the study results of these trials justified the waiver.^ Conclusion: The exception to the informed consent requirement is likely appropriate and justified in emergency research when implemented within the specified guidelines.^