Cold homes and fuel poverty have been identified as factors in health and social inequalities that could be alleviated through energy efficiency interventions. Research on fuel poverty and the health impacts of affordable warmth initiatives have to date primarily been conducted using quantitative and statistical methods, limiting the way how fuel poverty is understood. This study took a longitudinal focus group approach that allowed exploration of lived experiences of fuel poverty before and after an energy efficiency intervention. Focus group discussions were held with residents from three low-income communities before (n = 28) and after (n = 22) they received energy efficiency measures funded through a government-led scheme. The results show that improving the energy efficiency of homes at risk of fuel poverty has a profound impact on wellbeing and quality of life, financial stress, thermal comfort, social interactions and indoor space use. However, the process of receiving the intervention was experienced by some as stressful. There is a need for better community engagement and communication to improve the benefits delivered by fuel poverty programmes, as well as further qualitative exploration to better understand the wider impacts of fuel poverty and policy-led intervention schemes.

No abstract

Aim: Precarious employment is known to be detrimental to health, and some population subgroups (young individuals, migrant workers, and females) are at higher risk of precarious employment. However, it is not known if the risk to poor health outcomes is consistent across population subgroups. This scoping review explores differential impacts of precarious employment on health. Methods: Relevant studies published between 2009 and February 2019 were identified across PubMed, OVID Medline, PsycINFO, and Scopus. Articles were included if (1) they presented original data, (2) examined precarious employment within one of the subpopulations of interest, and (3) examined health outcomes. Results: Searches yielded 279 unique results, of which 14 met the eligibility criteria. Of the included studies, 12 studies examined differences between gender, 3 examined the health impacts on young individuals, and 3 examined the health of migrant workers. Mental health was explored in nine studies, general health in four studies, and mortality in two studies. Conclusion: Mental health was generally poorer in both male and female employees as a result of precarious employment, and males were also at higher risk of mortality. There was limited evidence that met our inclusion criteria, examining the health impacts on young individuals or migrant workers.

BackgroundResearch suggests that living in fuel poverty and cold homes contributes to poor physical and mental health, and that interventions targeted at those living in poor quality housing may lead to health improvements. However, little is known about the socio-economic intermediaries and processes that contribute to better health. This study examined the relationship between energy efficiency investments to homes in low-income areas and mental and physical health of residents, as well as a number of psychosocial outcomes likely to be part of the complex relationship between energy efficiency measures and health outcomes.MethodsA quasi-experimental field study with a controlled pretest-posttest design was conducted (intervention n = 364; control n = 418) to investigate the short-term health and psychosocial impacts of a domestic energy efficiency programme that took place across Wales between 2013 and 2015. Survey data were collected in the winters before and after installation of energy efficiency measures, including external wall insulation. The study used a multilevel modelling repeated measures approach to analyse the data.ResultsThe energy efficiency programme was not associated with improvements in physical and mental health (using the SF-12v2 physical and mental health composite scales) or reductions in self-reported respiratory and asthma symptoms. However, the programme was associated with improved subjective wellbeing (B = 0.38, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.65), as well as improvements in a number of psychosocial outcomes, including increased thermal satisfaction (OR = 3.83, 95% CI 2.40 to 5.90), reduced reports of putting up with feeling cold to save heating costs (OR = 0.49, CI = 0.25 to 0.94), fewer financial difficulties (B = −0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.05), and reduced social isolation (OR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.77).ConclusionThe study showed that investing in energy efficiency in low-income communities does not lead to self-reported health improvements in the short term. However, investments increased subjective wellbeing and were linked to a number of psychosocial intermediaries that are conducive to better health. It is likely that better living conditions contribute to improvements in health outcomes in the longer term. Better understanding of the impacts on recipients of energy efficiency schemes, could improve targeting of future fuel poverty policies.

BackgroundCold homes and fuel poverty contribute to health inequalities in ways that could be addressed through energy efficiency interventions.ObjectivesTo determine the health and psychosocial impacts of energy performance investments in low-income areas, particularly hospital admissions for cardiorespiratory conditions, prevalence of respiratory symptoms and mental health status, hydrothermal conditions and household energy use, psychosocial outcomes, cost consequences to the health system and the cost utility of these investments.DesignA mixed-methods study comprising data linkage (25,908 individuals living in 4968 intervention homes), a field study with a controlled pre-/post-test design (intervention,n = 418; control,n = 418), a controlled multilevel interrupted time series analysis of internal hydrothermal conditions (intervention,n = 48; control,n = 40) and a health economic assessment.SettingLow-income areas across Wales.ParticipantsResidents who received energy efficiency measures through the intervention programme and matched control groups.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcomes – emergency hospital admissions for cardiorespiratory conditions, self-reported respiratory symptoms, mental health status, indoor air temperature and indoor relative humidity. Secondary outcomes – emergency hospital admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-related cardiorespiratory conditions, excess winter admissions, health-related quality of life, subjective well-being, self-reported fuel poverty, financial stress and difficulties, food security, social interaction, thermal satisfaction and self-reported housing conditions.MethodsAnonymously linked individual health records for emergency hospital admissions were analysed using mixed multilevel linear models. A quasi-experimental controlled field study used a multilevel repeated measures approach. Controlled multilevel interrupted time series analyses were conducted to estimate changes in internal hydrothermal conditions following the intervention. The economic evaluation comprised cost–consequence and cost–utility analyses.Data sourcesThe Patient Episode Database for Wales 2005–14, intervention records from 28 local authorities and housing associations, and scheme managers who delivered the programme.ResultsThe study found no evidence of changes in physical health. However, there were improvements in subjective well-being and a number of psychosocial outcomes. The household monitoring study found that the intervention raised indoor temperature and helped reduce energy use. No evidence was found of substantial increases in indoor humidity levels. The health economic assessment found no explicit cost reductions to the health service as a result of non-significant changes in emergency admissions for cardiorespiratory conditions.LimitationsThis was a non-randomised intervention study with household monitoring and field studies that relied on self-response. Data linkage focused on emergency admissions only.ConclusionAlthough there was no evidence that energy performance investments provide physical health benefits or reduce health service usage, there was evidence that they improve social and economic conditions that are conducive to better health and improved subjective well-being. The intervention has been successful in reducing energy use and improving the living conditions of households in low-income areas. The lack of association of emergency hospital admissions with energy performance investments means that we were unable to evidence cost saving to health-service providers.Future workOur research suggests the importance of incorporating evaluations with follow-up into intervention research from the start.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme.

No abstract

Adult albino mammals have specific retinal defects, including reduced numbers of rod photoreceptors. To examine when this rod deficit arises and whether it exists in nonmammalian albinos, we have used absorbance spectrophotometry to measure photopigment levels in dark-adapted eyes taken from three groups of pigmented and albino animals: adult rodents (rats and mice), developing rats, and mature Xenopus frogs. Rhodopsin concentrations were consistently and significantly reduced in mammalian albinos compared to their wild-type counterparts from before the time of eye opening, but photopigment levels were similar in frogs of both pigmentation phenotypes. The results strongly suggest that deficits in the rod cell population arise early in development of the mammalian albino retina, but do not generalize to nonmammalian mutants lacking retinal melanin.

Living in cold conditions poses a risk to health, in particular to low-income, fuel-poor households. Improving the energy efficiency of the housing stock may bring multiple positive health gains through improved indoor temperatures and reduced fuel consumption. This study used a multilevel interrupted time-series approach to evaluate a policy-led energy-performance investment programme. Long-term monitoring data were collected for intervention and control households at baseline (n = 99) and follow-up (n = 88), creating a dataset with 15,771 data points for a series of daily-averaged hydrothermal outcome variables. The study found that the intervention raised indoor air temperature by on average 0.84 K as compared with control households, thereby bringing the majority of indoor temperature measurements within the 'healthy' comfort zone of 18-24°C, while average daily gas usage dropped by 37%. External wall insulation was the most effective measure to increase indoor air temperature. The greatest increases were found in the evening and at night, in the bedroom, and in British steel-framed buildings. No evidence was found that the intervention substantially increased indoor relative humidity levels when accompanied by mechanical ventilation. The study concludes that the multilevel interrupted time-series approach offers a useful model for evaluating housing improvement programmes.