RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) is increasing, especially among young people. Tools are needed to increase knowledge about sex education and STI prevention and treatment. Gamification can be a good training tool for both young people and health professionals. The primary objective of this study is to assess the impact of a training intervention on STI prevention, detection, and treatment in primary care professionals. METHODS/DESIGN: Multicentre cluster randomized controlled trial. Groups of primary care professionals will receive an intervention (online video game on sex education and STIs [SEXIT]) and will be compared with control groups that will not receive the intervention. Group assignments will be randomized by clusters. The study will consist of a pre-post evaluation of the intervention: a knowledge test will be administered before and after the intervention and 3 months after the intervention. This test will also be carried out on the same time sequence in the control groups. The impact of the training intervention will be assessed over a 6-month period, focusing on various variables associated with the clinical management of STIs. This evaluation entails the clinical records of diagnostic tests and antibiotic prescriptions related to the clinical approach to STIs. The required sample size is 262 (131 per group). DISCUSSION: Compared with those in the control group, improvements in knowledge and clinical behavioural outcomes after the intervention are expected for participants in the intervention groups. We plan to develop an educational video game to increase the knowledge about sexuality, STIs and violence. Protocol registered at ISRCTN with reference number ISRCTN17783607.
Asunto(s)
Educación Sexual , Salud Sexual , Enfermedades de Transmisión Sexual , Juegos de Video , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Atención Primaria de Salud , Salud Sexual/educación , Enfermedades de Transmisión Sexual/prevención & control , Enfermedades de Transmisión Sexual/diagnóstico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to evaluate the short- and long-term effects of the universal mental health literacy intervention "EspaiJove.net" in increasing mental health knowledge, help seeking and reducing stigma attitudes in the adolescent population. We also examine whether these effects depend on the intervention intensity. METHODS: A clustered school-based randomised controlled trial (cRCT) design. SUBJECTS: 1,298 secondary pupils aged 13 and 14 were recruited from 18 schools in Barcelona (Spain) between September 2016 and January 2018. INTERVENTION: Three programmes were assessed: 1) Sensitivity Programme (SP; 1 h); 2) Mental Health Literacy (MHL; 6 h); 3) MHL plus a first-person Stigma Reduction Programme (MHL + SR; 7 h); 4) Control group (CG): waiting list. OUTCOME MEASURES: 1) MHL: EspaiJove.net EMHL Test (First part and Second Part); 2) Stigma: RIBS and CAMI; 3) Help-seeking and use of treatment: GHSQ. ANALYSIS: The data was collected at baseline, post-intervention and 6 and 12 months later. An intention-to-treat analysis and imputation method was used to analyse the missing data. Intervention effects were analysed using multilevel modelling. RESULTS: One thousand thirty-two students were included (SP = 225; MHL = 261; MHL + SR = 295 and CG = 251). The MHL and MHL + SR interventions showed short- and long-term an increase in knowledge compared to SP and CG, but no significant change post-intervention or over time (First part p = 0.52 and Second part p = 0.62) between intervention groups and CG. No significant changes were found in stigma scores post-intervention or over time (CAMI p = 0.61 and RIBS p = 0.98) or in help-seeking scores (parent p = 0.69; teacher p = 0.23 and healthcare professional p = 0.75). The MHL + SR intervention was the best valued and recommended (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The three interventions of the EspaiJove.net programme (SP, MHL and MHL + SR) seem not to be effective in terms MHL, Stigma and help-seeking behaviours. The contact with a person who has experimented mental illness first-hand did not reduce stigma attitudes. Further research should deal with the heterogeneity of MHL interventions (concept, duration and measures) and identify which components of stigma interventions are effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03215654 (registration date 12 July 2017).
Asunto(s)
Alfabetización en Salud , Trastornos Mentales , Humanos , Adolescente , Salud Mental , Trastornos Mentales/terapia , Trastornos Mentales/psicología , Estigma Social , Alfabetización en Salud/métodos , Instituciones AcadémicasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a multifactorial condition with individual and societal impact that affects populations globally. Current guidelines for the treatment of LBP recommend pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies. The aim of this study was to compare usual clinical practice with the effectiveness of a biopsychosocial multidisciplinary intervention in reducing disability, severity of pain and improving quality of life in a working population of patients with subacute (2-12 weeks), non-specific LBP. METHODS: Longitudinal cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in 39 Primary Health Care Centres (PHCC) of Barcelona, with patients aged 18-65 years (n = 501; control group = 239; 26 PHCC, intervention group = 262; 13 PHCC). The control group received usual clinical care. The intervention group received usual clinical care plus a biopsychosocial multidisciplinary intervention, which consisted of physiotherapy, cognitive-behavioural therapy and medication. The main outcomes were changes in the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and the minimal clinically important differences. Secondary outcomes were changes in the McGill Pain (MGPQ) and Quality of Life (SF-12) questionnaires. Assessment was conducted at baseline, 3 and 12 months. Analysis was by intention-to-treat and analyst-blinded. Multiple imputations were used. RESULTS: Of the 501 enrolled patients, 421 (84%) provided data at 3 months, and 387 (77.2%) at 12 months. Mean age was 46.8 years (SD: 11.5) and 64.7% were women. In the adjusted analysis of the RMDQ outcome, only the intervention group showed significant changes at 3 months (- 1.33 points, p = 0.005) and at 12 months (- 1.11 points, p = 0.027), but minimal clinically important difference were detected in both groups. In the adjusted analysis of the RMDQ outcome, the intervention group improvement more than the control group at 3 months (- 1.33 points, p = 0.005) and at 12 months (- 1.11 points, p = 0.027). The intervention group presented a significant difference. Both groups presented a minimal clinically important difference, but more difference in the intervention group. The intervention group presented significant differences in the MGPQ scales of current pain intensity and VAS scores at 3 months. No statistically significant differences were found in the physical and mental domains of the SF-12. CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention in a working population with non-specific subacute LBP has a small positive impact on disability, and on the level of pain, mainly at short-term, but no difference on quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN21392091 (17 oct 2018) (Prospectively registred).