On the basis of a systematic review of studies of satisfactory quality, there is no evidence of a difference in nutrient quality between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs. The small differences in nutrient content detected are biologically plausible and mostly relate to differences in production methods.

Background: There is uncertainty over the nutrition-related benefits to health of consuming organic foods. Objective: We sought to assess the strength of evidence that nutrition-related health benefits could be attributed to the consumption of foods produced under organic farming methods. Design: We systematically searched PubMed, ISI Web of Science, CAB Abstracts, and Embase between 1 January 1958 and 15 September 2008 (and updated until 10 March 2010; contacted subject experts; and hand-searched bibliographies. We included peer-reviewed articles with English abstracts if they reported a comparison of health outcomes that resulted from consumption of or exposure to organic compared with conventionally produced foodstuffs. Results: From a total of 98,727 articles, we identified 12 relevant studies. A variety of different study designs were used; there were 8 reports (67%) of human studies, including 6 clinical trials, 1 cohort study, and 1 cross-sectional study, and 4 reports (33%) of studies in animals or human cell lines or serum. The results of the largest study suggested an association of reported consumption of strictly organic dairy products with a reduced risk of eczema in infants, but the majority of the remaining studies showed no evidence of differences in nutrition-related health outcomes that result from exposure to organic or conventionally produced foodstuffs. Given the paucity of available data, the heterogeneity of study designs used, exposures tested, and health outcomes investigated, no quantitative meta-analysis was justified. Conclusion: From a systematic review of the currently available published literature, evidence is lacking for nutrition-related health effects that result from the consumption of organically produced foodstuffs.Am J Clin Nutr 2010;92:203-10.

Good nutrition in the early years of life is essential, yet the diets of many pre-school children in the UK are known to be poor. Understanding the decisions parents make when feeding young children is very important in determining what type and nature of interventional support may be developed to promote good nutrition. The aim of this study was to explore using qualitative methods, parental perceptions of feeding their children in order to inform the development of a nutrition intervention. Focus groups (n = 33) and individual interviews (n = 6) were undertaken with parents, most of whom were attending children's centres in two deprived populations from one urban (Islington, north London) and one rural (Cornwall) location in England. Accounts of feeding pre-school children were primarily concerned with dealing with the practicalities of modern life, in particular the cost of food and the need to manage on a restricted household budget. Time pressures, a lack of perceived knowledge and confidence in preparing food and managing conflict over food choices between family members were also strong themes. Parents commonly reported differences between how they would like to feed their children and the reality of what they were able to do in their circumstances. These findings suggest that the poor eating habits of many pre-school children may be less a case of parental ignorance but rather the product of a range of coping strategies. Designing an intervention, which helps parents to build their confidence and self-efficacy, may enable them to make positive changes to their children's diets.

The aim of building climate resilient and environmentally sustainable health care facilities is: (a) to enhance their capacity to protect and improve the health of their target communities in an unstable and changing climate; and (b) to empower them to optimize the use of resources and minimize the release of pollutants and waste into the environment. Such health care facilities contribute to high quality of care and accessibility of services and, by helping reduce facility costs, also ensure better affordability. They are an important component of universal health coverage. Action is needed in at least four areas which are fundamental requirements for providing safe and quality care: having adequate numbers of skilled human resources, with decent working conditions, empowered and informed to respond to these environmental challenges; sustainable and safe management of water, sanitation and health care waste; sustainable energy services; and appropriate infrastructure and technologies, including all the operations that allow for the efficient functioning of a health care facility. Importantly, this work contributes to promoting actions to ensure that health care facilities are constantly and increasingly strengthened and continue to be efficient and responsive to improve health and contribute to reducing inequities and vulnerability within their local settings. To this end, we propose a framework to respond to these challenges.

No abstract

Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services in healthcare facilities are essential to ensure quality health care and to facilitate infection, prevention, and control practices. They are critical to responding to outbreaks and preventing healthcare-associated infections and, therefore, critical to global health security. Many healthcare facilities in low-and middle-income settings have limited WASH services. One tool to address this issue is the World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) Water and Sanitation for Health Facility Improvement Tool, or ''WASH FIT.'' WASH FIT is a continuous improvement tool based on key WHO environmental health and infection, prevention, and control standards. While using WASH FIT, internal teams regularly perform self-assessments at their facilities, using up to 65 WASH indicators to develop and implement an improvement plan. The Ministry of Health and Social Protection (MSPS) in Togo, with support from WHO and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), piloted this tool in 3 healthcare facilities. The pilot included facility assessments at 3 time points and in-depth interviews and document review 7 months after initiating WASH FIT. Facilities made improvements without significant external financial or material support. On average, pilot facilities improved from 18% of total indicators meeting standards at baseline to 44% after 7 months. Examples included improved drinking water supply, medical waste segregation, and increased soap at handwashing stations. Participants reported improvements in staff and patient satisfaction, hand hygiene, and occupational safety. Findings suggest that WASH FIT, coupled with training and supervision, may help facilities improve WASH services and practices, thus contributing to global health security. Based on these findings, the Togolese MSPS plans to scale up nationwide.

BackgroundPoor water sanitation and hygiene (WASH) in health care facilities increases hospital-associated infections, and the resulting greater use of second-line antibiotics drives antimicrobial resistance. Recognising the existing gaps, the World Health Organisations’ Water and Sanitation for Health Facility Improvement Tool (WASH-FIT) was designed for self-assessment. The tool was designed for small primary care facilities mainly providing outpatient and limited inpatient care and was not designed to compare hospital performance. Together with technical experts, we worked to adapt the tool for use in larger facilities with multiple inpatient units (wards), allowing for comparison between facilities and prompt action at different levels of the health system.MethodsWe adapted the existing facility improvement tool (WASH-FIT) to create a simple numeric scoring approach. This is to illustrate the variation across hospitals and to facilitate monitoring of progress over time and to group indicators that can be used to identify this variation. Working with stakeholders, we identified those responsible for action to improve WASH at different levels of the health system and used piloting, analysis of interview data to establish the feasibility and potential value of the WASH Facility Survey Tool (WASH-FAST) to demonstrate such variability.ResultsWe present an aggregate percentage score based on 65 indicators at the facility level to summarise hospitals’ overall WASH status and how this varies. Thirty-four of the 65 indicators spanning four WASH domains can be assessed at ward level enabling within hospital variations to be highlighted. Three levels of responsibility for WASH service monitoring and improvement were identified with stakeholders: the county/regional level, senior hospital management and hospital infection prevention and control committees.ConclusionWe propose WASH-FAST can be used as a survey tool to assess, measure and monitor the progress of WASH in hospitals in resource-limited settings, providing useful data for decision making and tracking improvements over time.

Background/ObjectivesTo determine the extent and sociodemographic determinants of anemia, overweight, metabolic syndrome (MetS), and the co-occurrence of anemia with cardiometabolic disease risk factors among a cohort of Indian adults.Subject/MethodsCross-sectional survey of adult men (n=3,322) and non-pregnant women (n=2,895) aged 18 y and older from the third wave of the Andhra Pradesh Children and Parents Study that assessed anemia, overweight based on Body Mass Index, and prevalence of MetS based on abdominal obesity, hypertension, and blood lipid and fasting glucose measures. We examined associations of education, wealth and urbanicity with these outcomes and their co-occurrence.ResultsThe prevalence of anemia and overweight was 40% and 29% among women, respectively, and 10% and 25% among men (P<0.001), respectively, while the prevalence of MetS was the same across sexes (15%) (P=0.55). The prevalence of concurrent anemia and overweight (9%), and anemia and MetS (4.5%) was highest among women. Household wealth was positively associated with overweight and MetS across sexes (P<0.05). Independent of household wealth, higher education was positively correlated with MetS among men (OR (95% CI): MetS: 1.4 (0.99, 2.0)) and negatively correlated with MetS among women (MetS: 0.54 (0.29, 0.99)). Similar sex-specific associations were observed for the co-occurrence of anemia with overweight and MetS.ConclusionWomen in this region of India may be particularly vulnerable to co-occurring anemia and cardiometabolic risk, and associated adverse health outcomes as the nutrition transition advances in India.