BackgroundOne in four adults are estimated to be at medium to high risk of malnutrition when screened using the ‘Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool’ upon admission to hospital in the United Kingdom. The Need for Nutrition Education/Education Programme (NNEdPro) Group was developed to address this issue and the Nutrition Education and Leadership for Improved Clinical Outcomes (NELICO) is a project within this group.The objective of NELICO was to assess whether an intensive training intervention combining clinical and public health nutrition, organisational management and leadership strategies, could equip junior doctors to contribute to improvement in nutrition awareness among healthcare professionals in the National Health Service in England.MethodsThree junior doctors were self-selected from the NNEdPro Group original training. Each junior doctor recruited three additional team members to attend an intensive training weekend incorporating nutrition, change management and leadership. This equipped them to run nutrition awareness weeks in their respective hospitals. Knowledge, attitudes and practices were evaluated at baseline as well as one and four months post-training as a quality assurance measure. The number and type of educational events held, pre-awareness week Online Hospital Survey results, attendance and qualitative feedback from training sessions, effectiveness of dissemination methods such as awareness stalls, Hospital Nutrition Attitude Survey results and overall feedback were also used to determine impact.ResultsWhen the weighted average score for knowledge, attitudes and practices at baseline was compared with four months post-intervention scores, there was a significant increase in the overall score (p = 0.03). All three hospital teams conducted an effective nutrition awareness week, as determined by qualitative data collected from interviews and feedback from educational sessions.ConclusionThe NELICO project and its resulting nutrition awareness weeks were considered innovative in terms of concept and content. It was considered useful, both for the junior doctors who showed improvement in their nutrition knowledge and reported enthusiasm and for the hospital setting, increasing awareness of clinical and public health nutrition among healthcare professionals. The NELICO project is one innovative method to promote nutrition awareness in tomorrow’s doctors and shows they have the enthusiasm and drive to be nutrition champions.

Objective To assess, within communities experiencing Ebola virus outbreaks, the risks associated with the disposal of human waste and to generate recommendations for mitigating such risks. Methods A team with expertise in the Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points framework identified waste products from the care of individuals with Ebola virus disease and constructed, tested and confirmed flow diagrams showing the creation of such products. After listing potential hazards associated with each step in each flow diagram, the team conducted a hazard analysis, determined critical control points and made recommendations to mitigate the transmission risks at each control point. Findings The collection, transportation, cleaning and shared use of blood-soiled fomites and the shared use of latrines contaminated with blood or bloodied faeces appeared to be associated with particularly high levels of risk of Ebola virus transmission. More moderate levels of risk were associated with the collection and transportation of material contaminated with bodily fluids other than blood, shared use of latrines soiled with such fluids, the cleaning and shared use of fomites soiled with such fluids, and the contamination of the environment during the collection and transportation of blood-contaminated waste. Conclusion The risk of the waste-related transmission of Ebola virus could be reduced by the use of full personal protective equipment, appropriate hand hygiene and an appropriate disinfectant after careful cleaning. Use of the Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points framework could facilitate rapid responses to outbreaks of emerging infectious disease.

This paper introduces a novel method for sampling pathogens in natural environments. It uses fabric boot socks worn over walkers' shoes to allow the collection of composite samples over large areas. Wide-area sampling is better suited to studies focusing on human exposure to pathogens (e.g., recreational walking). This sampling method is implemented using a citizen science approach: groups of three walkers wearing boot socks undertook one of six routes, 40 times over 16 months in the North West (NW) and East Anglian (EA) regions of England. To validate this methodology, we report the successful implementation of this citizen science approach, the observation that Campylobacter bacteria were detected on 47% of boot socks, and the observation that multiple boot socks from individual walks produced consistent results. The findings indicate higher Campylobacter levels in the livestock-dominated NW than in EA (55.8% versus 38.6%). Seasonal differences in the presence of Campylobacter bacteria were found between the regions, with indications of winter peaks in both regions but a spring peak in the NW. The presence of Campylobacter bacteria on boot socks was negatively associated with ambient temperature (P = 0.011) and positively associated with precipitation (P < 0.001), results consistent with our understanding of Campylobacter survival and the probability of material adhering to boot socks. Campylobacter jejuni was the predominant species found; Campylobacter coli was largely restricted to the livestock-dominated NW. Source attribution analysis indicated that the potential source of C. jejuni was predominantly sheep in the NW and wild birds in EA but did not differ between peak and nonpeak periods of human incidence.IMPORTANCE There is debate in the literature on the pathways through which pathogens are transferred from the environment to humans. We report on the success of a novel method for sampling human-pathogen interactions using boot socks and citizen science techniques, which enable us to sample human-pathogen interactions that may occur through visits to natural environments. This contrasts with traditional environmental sampling, which is based on spot sampling techniques and does not sample human-pathogen interactions. Our methods are of practical value to scientists trying to understand the transmission of pathogens from the environment to people. Our findings provide insight into the risk of Campylobacter exposure from recreational visits and an understanding of seasonal differences in risk and the factors behind these patterns. We highlight the Campylobacter species predominantly encountered and the potential sources of C. jejuni.

ObjectivesTo estimate the burden of intestinal infectious disease (IID) in the UK and determine whether disease burden estimations using a retrospective study design differ from those using a prospective study design.Design/SettingA retrospective telephone survey undertaken in each of the four countries comprising the United Kingdom. Participants were randomly asked about illness either in the past 7 or 28 days.Participants14,813 individuals for all of whom we had a legible recording of their agreement to participateOutcomesSelf-reported IID, defined as loose stools or clinically significant vomiting lasting less than two weeks, in the absence of a known non-infectious cause.ResultsThe rate of self-reported IID varied substantially depending on whether asked for illness in the previous 7 or 28 days. After standardising for age and sex, and adjusting for the number of interviews completed each month and the relative size of each UK country, the estimated rate of IID in the 7-day recall group was 1,530 cases per 1,000 person-years (95% CI: 1135–2113), while in the 28-day recall group it was 533 cases per 1,000 person-years (95% CI: 377–778). There was no significant variation in rates between the four countries. Rates in this study were also higher than in a related prospective study undertaken at the same time.ConclusionsThe estimated burden of disease from IID varied dramatically depending on study design. Retrospective studies of IID give higher estimates of disease burden than prospective studies. Of retrospective studies longer recall periods give lower estimated rates than studies with short recall periods. Caution needs to be exercised when comparing studies of self-reported IID as small changes in study design or case definition can markedly affect estimated rates.