Introduction. Climate change projections indicate that droughts will become more intense in the 21 century in some areas of the world. The El Niño Southern Oscillation is associated with drought in some countries, and forecasts can provide advance warning of the increased risk of adverse climate conditions. The most recent available data from EMDAT estimates that over 50 million people globally were affected by drought in 2011. Documentation of the health effects of drought is difficult, given the complexity in assigning a beginning/end and because effects tend to accumulate over time. Most health impacts are indirect because of its link to other mediating circumstances like loss of livelihoods. Methods. The following databases were searched: MEDLINE; CINAHL; Embase; PsychINFO, Cochrane Collection. Key references from extracted papers were hand-searched, and advice from experts was sought for further sources of literature. Inclusion criteria for papers summarised in tables include: explicit link made between drought as exposure and human health outcomes; all study designs/methods; all countries/contexts; any year of publication. Exclusion criteria include: drought meaning shortage unrelated to climate; papers not published in English; studies on dry/arid climates unless drought was noted as an abnormal climatological event. No formal quality evaluation was used on papers meeting inclusion criteria. Results. 87 papers meeting the inclusion criteria are summarised in tables. Additionally, 59 papers not strictly meeting the inclusion criteria are used as supporting text in relevant parts of the results section. Main categories of findings include: nutrition-related effects (including general malnutrition and mortality, micronutrient malnutrition, and anti-nutrient consumption); water-related disease (including E coli, cholera and algal bloom); airborne and dust-related disease (including silo gas exposure and coccidioidomycosis); vector borne disease (including malaria, dengue and West Nile Virus); mental health effects (including distress and other emotional consequences); and other health effects (including wildfire, effects of migration, and damage to infrastructure). Conclusions. The probability of drought-related health impacts varies widely and largely depends upon drought severity, baseline population vulnerability, existing health and sanitation infrastructure, and available resources with which to mitigate impacts as they occur. The socio-economic environment in which drought occurs influences the resilience of the affected population. Forecasting can be used to provide advance warning of the increased risk of adverse climate conditions and can support the disaster risk reduction process. Despite the complexities involved in documentation, research should continue and results should be shared widely in an effort to strengthen drought preparedness and response activities.

Introduction While most people who are involved in disasters recover with the support of their families, friends and colleagues, the effects on some people's health, relationships and welfare can be extensive and sustained. Flooding can pose substantial social and mental health problems that may continue over extended periods of time. Flooding can challenge the psychosocial resilience of the hardiest of people who are affected.

No abstract

Objectives(1) To report maternal and newborn outcomes of pregnant women in areas of social deprivation in inner city London. (2) To compare the effect of caseload midwifery with standard care on maternal and newborn outcomes in this cohort of women.DesignRetrospective observational cohort study.SettingFour council wards (electoral districts) in inner city London, where over 90% of residents are in the two most deprived quintiles of the English Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) (2019) and the population is ethnically diverse.ParticipantsAll women booked for antenatal care under Guys and St Thomas’ National Health Service Foundation Trust after 11 July 2018 (when the Lambeth Early Action Partnership (LEAP*) caseload midwifery team was implemented) until data collection 18 June 2020. This included 523 pregnancies in the LEAP area, of which 230 were allocated to caseload midwifery, and 8430 pregnancies from other areas.Main outcome measuresTo explore if targeted caseload midwifery (known to reduce preterm birth) will improve important measurable outcomes (preterm birth, mode of birth and newborn outcomes).ResultsThere was a significant reduction in preterm birth rate in women allocated to caseload midwifery, when compared with those who received traditional midwifery care (5.1% vs 11.2%; risk ratio: 0.41; p=0.02; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.86; number needed to treat: 11.9). Caesarean section births were significantly reduced in women allocated to caseload midwifery care, when compared with traditional midwifery care (24.3% vs 38.0%; risk ratio: 0.64: p=0.01; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.90; number needed to treat: 7.4) including emergency caesarean deliveries (15.2% vs 22.5%; risk ratio: 0.59; p=0.03; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.94; number needed to treat: 10) without increase in neonatal unit admission or stillbirth.ConclusionThis study shows that a model of caseload midwifery care implemented in an inner city deprived community improves outcome by significantly reducing preterm birth and birth by caesarean section when compared with traditional care. This data trend suggests that when applied to targeted groups (women in higher IMD quintile and women of diverse ethnicity) that the impact of intervention is greater.

BackgroundChildren who have adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) tend to have more physical and mental health problems when they are adults. Evidence suggests that partial or no immunisation status can be associated with factors (including ACEs) that make children at higher risk of poor outcomes.AimTo explore the idea that ‘missed immunisations’ could be used as a proxy indicator in identifying children at risk of worse outcomes.Design and settingService improvement study in seven GP practices in South London, UK.MethodChildren aged 0–3 who were three or more months late for immunisations were identified; their computer notes were reviewed during interdisciplinary meetings between health visitors and GP practice staff. A bespoke template was used to guide discussions and to record action plans. Evaluation methods included a survey of practitioners and anonymised questionnaires about care management for a sample of children.ResultsIssues of concern including some ACEs (eg, domestic abuse, mental health concerns in parent) were identified in 57% of children. 94% of practitioners found multidisciplinary meetings useful; 62% of practitioners changed the way they thought about providing care to very young children and their families. Of the children discussed during multidisciplinary meetings, 38% subsequently caught up on immunisations.Conclusion‘Late for immunisations’ appears to be a useful indicator for proactively identifying children with issues that make them at risk of poorer outcomes. Integrated working between GPs and health visitors is important for ensuring targeted care is provided to families.