Interventions for cold homes: a rapid review of the health impacts

BACKGROUND

Cold homes are associated with an increased risk of adverse health outcomes for older people. To mitigate this risk, homes need to be heated to an appropriate temperature. This review aims to identify interventions designed to improve heating and temperatures within homes and summarize its impact on health, health service utilization and cost effectiveness.

METHODS

A rapid review was conducted. Studies assessing the effects of structural, financial, or behavioural interventions designed to improve home temperatures of residents aged 18+ years were eligible. Searches were carried out in four databases. A search for grey literature, and backward and forward citation searching were performed. Data were summarized in a narrative synthesis and mapped using EPPI-Reviewer and EPPI-Mapper software.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies reported across 19 publications were included. Structural interventions were associated with better mental health and quality of life, a reduction in health service utilization, and improvements in satisfaction with internal home temperature, social interactions and financial difficulties. The impact on physical health outcomes varied by age, gender and long-term conditions. Evidence about the impact of behavioural interventions was inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

Structural improvements to increase home temperatures may offer the potential to improve some aspects of health. However, the impact on physical health, including which groups are most likely to benefit, is unclear. Key gaps include the lack of evidence about the impact of financial interventions, and the impact of all types of interventions, on quality of life, mortality and costs.

The performance of FIT-based and other risk prediction models for colorectal neoplasia in symptomatic patients: a systematic review

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are increasing internationally. Endoscopy services are under significant pressure with many overwhelmed. Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has been advocated to identify a high-risk population of symptomatic patients requiring definitive investigation by colonoscopy. Combining FIT with other factors in a risk prediction model could further improve performance in identifying those requiring investigation most urgently. We systematically reviewed performance of models predicting risk of CRC and/or advanced colorectal polyps (ACP) in symptomatic patients, with a particular focus on those models including FIT.

Methods

The review protocol was published on PROSPERO (CRD42022314710). Searches were conducted from database inception to April 2023 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane libraries, SCOPUS and CINAHL. Risk of bias of each study was assessed using The Prediction study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool. A narrative synthesis based on the guidelines for Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis was performed due to study heterogeneity.

Findings

We included 62 studies; 23 included FIT (n = 22) or guaiac Faecal Occult Blood Testing (n = 1) combined with one or more other variables. Twenty-one studies were conducted solely in primary care. Generally, prediction models including FIT consistently had good discriminatory ability for CRC/ACP (i.e. AUC >0.8) and performed better than models without FIT although some models without FIT also performed well. However, many studies did not present calibration and internal and external validation were limited. Two studies were rated as low risk of bias; neither model included FIT.

Interpretation

Risk prediction models, including and not including FIT, show promise for identifying those most at risk of colorectal neoplasia. Substantial limitations in evidence remain, including heterogeneity, high risk of bias, and lack of external validation. Further evaluation in studies adhering to gold standard methodology, in appropriate populations, is required before widespread adoption in clinical practice.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) [Health Technology Assessment Programme (HTA) Programme (Project number 133852).

Experiences of Non-Pharmaceutical Primary Care Interventions for Common Mental Health Disorders in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Groups: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies

Common mental health disorders (CMDs) disproportionately affect people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. Non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as 'social prescribing' and new models of care and clinical practice, are becoming increasingly prevalent in primary care. However, little is known about how these interventions work and their impact on socioeconomic inequalities in health. Focusing on people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage, this systematic review aims to: (1) explore the mechanisms by which non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions impact CMD-related health outcomes and inequalities; (2) identify the barriers to, and facilitators of, their implementation in primary care. This study is a systematic review of qualitative studies. Six bibliographic databases were searched (Medline, ASSIA, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo and Scopus) and additional grey literature sources were screened. The included studies were thematically analysed. Twenty-two studies were included, and three themes were identified: (1) agency; (2) social connections; (3) socioeconomic environment. The interventions were experienced as being positive for mental health when people felt a sense of agency and social connection. The barriers to effectiveness and engagement included socioeconomic deprivation and underfunding of community sector organisations. If non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions for CMDs are to avoid widening health inequalities, key socioeconomic barriers to their accessibility and implementation must be addressed.