Search

Background: Unhealthy lifestyles in early childhood are a major global health challenge. These lifestyles often persist from generation to generation and contribute to a vicious cycle of health-related and social problems. This design article presents a study evaluating the effects of two novel healthy school interventions. The main outcome measure will be changes in children's body mass index (BMI). In addition, lifestyle behaviours, academic achievement, child well-being, socio-economic differences, and societal costs will be examined.Methods: In close collaboration with various stakeholders, a quasi-experimental study was developed, for which children of four intervention schools (n = 1200) in the southern part of the Netherlands are compared with children of four control schools (n = 1200) in the same region. The interventions started in November 2015. In two of the four intervention schools, a whole-school approach named 'The Healthy Primary School of the Future', is implemented with the aim of improving physical activity and dietary behaviour. For this intervention, pupils are offered an extended curriculum, including a healthy lunch, more physical exercises, and social and educational activities, next to the regular school curriculum. In the two other intervention schools, a physical-activity school approach called 'The Physical Activity School', is implemented, which is essentially similar to the other intervention, except that no lunch is provided. The interventions proceed during a period of 4 years. Apart from the effectiveness of both interventions, the process, the cost-effectiveness, and the expected legal implications are studied. Data collection is conducted within the school system. The baseline measurements started in September 2015 and yearly follow-up measurements are taking place until 2019.Discussion: A whole-school approach is a new concept in the Netherlands. Due to its innovative, multifaceted nature and sound scientific foundation, these integrated programmes have the potential to form a template for primary schools worldwide. The effects of this approach may extend further than the outcomes associated with well-being and academic achievement, potentially impacting legal and cultural aspects in our society.Trial Registration: The study protocol was registered in the database ClinicalTrials.gov on 14-06-2016 with the reference number NCT02800616 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on the continuity of healthcare provision. Appointments, treatments and surgeries for non-COVID patients were often delayed, with associated health losses for patients involved., Objective: To develop a method to quantify the health impact of delayed elective care for non-COVID patients., Methods: A model was developed that estimated the backlog of surgical procedures in 2020 and 2021 using hospital registry data. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were obtained from the literature to estimate the non-generated QALYs related to the backlog. In sensitivity analyses QALY values were varied by type of patient prioritization. Scenario analyses for future increased surgical capacity were performed., Results: In 2020 and 2021 an estimated total of 305,374 elective surgeries were delayed. These delays corresponded with 319,483 non-generated QALYs. In sensitivity analyses where QALYs varied by type of patient prioritization, non-generated QALYs amounted to 150,973 and 488,195 QALYs respectively. In scenario analyses for future increased surgical capacity in 2022-2026, the non-generated QALYs decreased to 311,220 (2% future capacity increase per year) and 300,710 (5% future capacity increase per year). Large differences exist in the extent to which different treatments contributed to the total health losses., Conclusions: The method sheds light on the indirect harm related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The results can be used for policy evaluations of COVID-19 responses, in preparations for future waves or other pandemics and in prioritizing the allocation of resources for capacity increases., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Schools play an important role in promoting healthy behaviours in children and can offer perspective in the ongoing obesity epidemic. The 'Healthy Primary School of the Future' (HPSF) aims to improve children's health and well-being by enhancing school health promotion. The current study aims to assess the effect of HPSF on children's body mass index (BMI) z-score after 1 and 2 years follow-up and to investigate whether HPSF has different effects within specific subgroups of children., Design: A longitudinal quasi-experimental design., Setting: Four intervention and four control schools participated; located in a low socioeconomic status region in the Netherlands., Participants: 1676 children (aged 4-12 years)., Interventions: HPSF uses a contextual systems approach and includes health-promoting changes in the school. Central to HPSF is the provision of a daily healthy lunch and structured physical activity sessions each day. Two intervention schools implemented both changes (full HPSF), two intervention schools implemented only the physical activity change (partial HPSF)., Main Outcome Measures: BMI z-score, determined by measurements of children's height and weight at baseline, after 1 and 2 years follow-up., Results: The intervention effect was significant after 1-year follow-up in the partial HPSF (standardised effect size (ES)=-0.05), not significant in the full HPSF (ES=-0.04). After 2 years follow-up, BMI z-score had significantly decreased in children of both the full HPSF (ES=-0.08) and the partial HPSF (ES=-0.07) compared with children of the control schools, whose mean BMI z-score increased from baseline to 2 years. None of the potential effect modifiers (gender, baseline study year, socioeconomic status and baseline weight status) were significant., Conclusions: HPSF was effective after 1 and 2 years follow-up in lowering children's BMI z-scores. No specific subgroups of children could be identified who benefitted more from the intervention., Trial Registration Number: NCT02800616., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Combatting disparities in health outcomes among children is a major public health concern. This study focuses on two questions: (1) To what extent does socioeconomic status (SES) contribute to disparities in health outcomes? and (2) To what extent can social inequalities in health outcomes be explained by differences in children's health behaviours?, Design: This study included 2-year follow-up data of 1259 children (4-12 years of age) who participated in the 'Healthy Primary School of the Future' project (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02800616). SES was measured by maternal and paternal education and household income (adjusted for family size). Health outcomes were body mass index (BMI) z-score, health resource use, school absenteeism, health-related quality of life and psychosocial health, measured over 2 years of follow-up (2015-2017). Health behaviours included physical activity, and consumption of fruits, vegetables and sweetened beverages. Associations between SES and baseline health behaviours were examined, and mixed models for repeated measures were used to assess associations between SES and health outcomes over 2 years of follow-up., Results: A high socioeconomic background was significantly associated with better health outcomes (all outcomes). For example, children with a low SES had higher BMI z-scores (beta coefficient: 0.42, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.62) and higher consumption healthcare costs (ratio of mean costs: 2.21, 95% CI 1.57 to 3.10). Effects of SES changed very little after controlling for health behaviours., Discussion: Our findings strongly suggest that socioeconomic background has a pervasive impact on disparities in child health, but gives little support to the idea that social inequalities in child health can be tackled by means of lifestyle interventions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Current guidelines for economic evaluations do not provide specific recommendations for the evaluation of school-based lifestyle interventions. This study examined and discussed the key aspects in the design of economic evaluations on school-based interventions targeting weight-related behaviours among 4-12 year olds. The PubMed and CRD databases (NHS EED) were searched. Grey literature was identified from reference lists and websites of relevant organizations. Full economic evaluations on school-based interventions targeting physical activity, sedentariness, or diet were selected. Key aspects included the objective, audience, intervention, comparator, population, type of analysis, perspective, costs, outcomes, and time horizon. Information was also extracted on measuring and valuing costs and outcomes, linking and extrapolating outcomes, and the maintenance of intervention effects. The 23 included studies reported on cost-effectiveness (CEAs) (N = 12), cost-utility (CUAs) (N = 9), social cost benefit (SCBA) (N = 2), and social return on investment (SROI) (N = 1) analysis. The usual practice comparator was generally not clearly defined. The SROI analysis was the single study that included outcomes in other persons than the child. Healthcare costs (N = 14), productivity costs (N = 4), and costs to the household (N = 3), or education (N = 2) sector were examined. The outcome in trial-based CEAs consisted of a variety of weight-related measures. Seven distinctive models were used to extrapolate health and/or productivity costs. To enhance the usefulness of economic evaluations on school-based lifestyle interventions in allocating public health budgets, transparent reporting on key aspects, broadening the scope of economic evaluations, and standardizing the measurement, valuation, and extrapolation of costs and outcomes should be improved. This study was conducted in Maastricht, the Netherlands., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This study assesses socio-economic health inequalities (SEHI) over primary school-age (4- to 12-years old) across 13 outcomes (i.e. body-mass index [BMI], handgrip strength, cardiovascular fitness, current physical conditions, moderate to vigorous physical activity, sleep duration, daily fruit and vegetable consumption, daily breakfast, exposure to smoking, mental strengths and difficulties, self-efficacy, school absenteeism and learning disabilities), covering four health domains (i.e. physical health, health behaviour, mental health and academic health)., Methods: Multilevel mixed effect (linear and logistic) regression analyses were applied to cross-sectional data of a Dutch quasi-experimental study that included 1403 pupils from nine primary schools. Socioeconomic background (high-middle-low) was indicated by maternal education (n = 976) and parental material deprivation (n = 784)., Results: Pupils with higher educated mothers had lower BMIs, higher handgrip strength and higher cardiovascular fitness; their parents reported more daily fruit and vegetable consumption, daily breakfast and less exposure to smoking. Furthermore these pupils showed less mental difficulties and less school absenteeism compared with pupils whose mothers had a lower education level. When using parental material deprivation as socio-economic indicator, similar results were found for BMI, cardiovascular fitness, sleep duration, exposure to smoking and mental strengths and difficulties. Socio-economic differences in handgrip strength, cardiovascular fitness and sleep duration were larger in older than in younger pupils., Conclusions: Childhood SEHI are clearly found across multiple domains, and some are larger in older than in younger pupils. Interventions aiming to tackle SEHI may therefore need a comprehensive and perhaps more fundamental approach.