Perspectives in Public Health最新文献

Background: 'Dark kitchens' are an innovative and potentially disruptive addition to the global food environment with potential implications for policy, practice and public health. In the UK, dark kitchens currently represent approximately 15% of all food retailers across the three major online food delivery platforms in England (e.g. Just Eat, Deliveroo, Uber Eats), contributing significantly to the digital food environment. To date, dark kitchens have been poorly defined, under-researched and their wider impact poorly understood.

Aim: Therefore, the aim of this work was to coproduce a consensus definition of dark kitchens to be used across multiple disciplines.

Methods: A series of consultations took place with stakeholders including consumers, local authority representatives, academics, dark kitchen employees, and national governing bodies to understand knowledge and currently used definitions of dark kitchens. Mixed-method approaches were used involving questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, and workshops.

Results: The stakeholder consultation process provided a robust methodology through which a consensus definition of dark kitchens was agreed. Each project group provided a definition which was scribed and annotated to understand the key components of importance within the definitions, while additional and unique components were discussed and debated by the expert working group before being accepted or rejected. In addition, short- and long-term benefits of such a definition were outlined for all stakeholder groups. Following peer-review from local authority, industry and governing body stakeholders, a final definition was produced.

Conclusion: The adoption of a consensus definition of dark kitchens is pivotal to the cross-sectoral work and understanding of many stakeholder groups. The definition allows for transparency and improved communication between dark kitchen stakeholders and provides the opportunity to drive public health agendas at multiple points within the food system.

Aims: This short report summarises the findings of a 51-page report on the social value of movement and dance in England, highlighting its contribution to public health, individual wellbeing, and community development.

Methods: The report synthesises data from multiple sources and quantifies the social value of movement and dance.

Results: Findings indicate that movement and dance contribute £3.5 billion in social value, including £430 million in healthcare savings and a £2.1 billion uplift in mental wellbeing. Movement and dance foster physical health benefits comparable to those of other exercise forms while providing unique psychological and social advantages.

Conclusion: Movement and dance play vital roles in public health by preventing illness, improving mental wellbeing, and fostering community engagement. To maximise their impact, greater integration within health practices, funding, research investment, and policy engagement is needed.

In this article, Noonan contends that boosting public support is vital for increasing pressure on the Government to enact change for the common good. He argues that the public health community can build public support for the required structural changes by challenging misinformation and sharing a new story.

This Feature article draws attention to the challenges care workers who work in the community face accessing hygiene facilities such as toilets and the impact this has on their health and working conditions. There is public awareness of the challenges faced by delivery drivers but the conditions faced by care workers are not recognised as frequently.

Aims: For better understanding of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mortality in different countries, we studied the excess mortality from any cause during 2020 and 2021 in 22 European countries, and its relationship with three socioeconomic variables: life expectancy at birth in 2019, per capita income, and low education level.

Methods: Using an ecological design, we analyzed excess mortality data between January 2020 and December 2021 in 22 European countries, obtained from the EuroMOMO surveillance system. Using weekly Z-score data for each country, we estimated the annual average deviation in mortality during 2020 and 2021 for each country. We analyzed possible relationships between the excess mortality and three independent variables: gross domestic product per capita (GDPpc) in 2020, life expectancy at birth in 2019, and proportion of the population over age 18 years with a lower than secondary education level in 2018.

Results: In the 22 European countries analyzed, the total number of excess deaths in 2020 and 2021 was 800,011 (11%) more than expected, with deaths among those aged 65 years and over accounting for 87.66% of these. Excess mortality was higher in 2020, especially in Spain, UK, Italy, and France. In 2021, excess mortality was highest in Hungary, the Netherlands, France, and Germany. Excess mortality during 2021 was inversely correlated with life expectancy (r =-.489, p = .021) and income level (r =-.550, p = .008).

Conclusion: Reducing socioeconomic inequalities among countries not only improves conditions of most disadvantages but also will help to reduce excess of mortality from future pandemics.

Aim: There are direct links between housing and health. However, there is a lack of systematic reviews that bring together the evidence to outline the health impacts of exposures in housing and housing interventions. This article aims to address this gap by synthesising systematic reviews on the themes of housing exposures and interventions.

Methods: We searched four databases: Scopus (Elsevier), PsycINFO (OvidSP), Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index (Web of Science Core Collection), and the Sociology Collection (Proquest). We used keywords related to 'health' and 'city*' and included all types of reviews. We extracted data into a predesigned extraction form and synthesised information narratively.

Results: 745 articles were identified and screened, of which 256 reviews were included and 16 (6%) related to housing. All reviews related to housing exposures found that poor housing, including crowding, coldness, dampness, mould, and indoor air pollution had a negative impact on health. Most reviews found that housing interventions such as housing refurbishment, heating, and energy efficiency interventions positively impacted health outcomes. An online toolkit was developed to disseminate and communicate this research: https://www.healthycitiescommission.org/toolkit/.

Conclusion: Governments have a pivotal role in addressing health issues related to housing interventions and exposures in housing. This includes interventions through building regulations following international guidance and financial assistance to encourage housing modifications that will improve health.