Experiences and perceptions of nurses working night shift: a qualitative systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to examine the available evidence on the experiences and perceptions of nurses working the night shift within any specialty in the acute care, subacute, or long-term care setting. INTRODUCTION: Nurses are required for around-the-clock patient care. Night shift nurses can experience detrimental effects because of their work hours, which disrupt their normal circadian rhythm. Understanding nurses' experiences and perceptions when working night shift will facilitate the development of strategies to minimize the potential negative effects of working at night. In examining nurses' experiences and perceptions of working night shift, there is scope to explore how to improve night shift nurses' practice environment and job satisfaction, which will then translate to improved nurse and patient outcomes. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review included qualitative studies focused on the experiences and perceptions of registered nurses and licensed practical nurses who work the night shift or rotate between day and night shift. METHODS: This review followed the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of qualitative evidence. The methodology used was consistent with the a priori protocol. Studies included in this review were those published in full text, English, and between 1983 (when the seminal work on hospitals that attract and retain nurses was published) and February 2021, when the search was completed. The main databases searched for published and unpublished studies included MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science.From the search, two reviewers independently screened the studies against the inclusion criteria, and then papers selected for inclusion were assessed for methodological quality. Qualitative data were extracted from the included papers independently by the four reviewers. Results from each reviewer were discussed and clarified to reach agreement. The extracted findings were pooled and examined for shared meaning, coded, and grouped into categories. Common categories were grouped into meta-synthesis to produce a comprehensive set of synthesized findings. The final synthesized findings were graded using the ConQual approach to determine the level of confidence (trust) users may have in the value of the synthesized findings. RESULTS: Thirty-four papers, representing 33 studies, met the criteria for inclusion. The studies were conducted in 11 countries across six continents, with a total of 601 participants. From these, a total of 220 findings were extracted and combined to form 11 categories based on similarity in meaning, and three syntheses were derived: i) The "Other" Shift: the distinctiveness of night nursing; ii) Juggling sleep and all aspects of life when working nights; and iii) Existing in the Twilight Zone: battling the negative impact of sleep deprivation consumes nurses who strive to keep patients, self, and others safe. CONCLUSIONS: The major conclusions from this review are the uniqueness of working the night shift and the sleep deprivation of night nurses. Organizational strategies and support are needed for those working this shift, which will enhance nurse and patient safety. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42019135294.

Five common pitfalls in mixed methods systematic reviews: lessons learned.

OBJECTIVES: Mixed methods systematic reviews (MMSRs) combine quantitative and qualitative evidence within a single review. Since the revision of the JBI methodology for MMSRs in 2020, there has been an increasing number of reviews published that claim to follow this approach. A preliminary examination of these indicated that authors frequently deviated from the methodology. This article outlines five common 'pitfalls' associated with undertaking MMSR and provides direction for future reviewers attempting MMSR. METHODS: Forward citation tracking identified 17 reviews published since the revision of the JBI mixed methods methodological guidance. Methods used in these reviews were then examined against the JBI methodology to identify deviations. RESULTS: The issues identified related to the rationale for choosing the methodological approach, an incorrect synthesis and integration approach chosen to answer the review question/s posed, the exclusion of primary mixed methods studies in the review, the lack of detail regarding the process of data transformation, and a lack of 'mixing' of the quantitative and qualitative components. CONCLUSION: This exercise was undertaken to assist systematic reviewers considering conducting an MMSR and MMSR users to identify potential areas where authors tend to deviate from the methodological approach. Based on these findings a series of recommendations are provided.

Time to Reflect and Take Action on Health Disparities and Health Inequities.

The United States healthcare system underperforms in healthcare access, quality, and cost resulting in some of the poorest health outcomes among comparable countries, despite spending more of its gross national product on healthcare than any other country in the world. Within the United States, there are significant healthcare disparities based on race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, education level, sexual orientation, gender identity, and geographic location. COVID-19 has illuminated the racial disparities in health outcomes. This article provides an overview of some of the main concepts related to health disparities generally, and in orthopaedics specifically. It provides an introduction to health equity terminology, issues of bias and equity, and potential interventions to achieve equity and social justice by addressing commonly asked questions and then introduces the reader to persistent orthopaedic health disparities specific to total hip and total knee arthroplasty.

A Population Health Perspective on Racism and Racial Microaggressions.

Racism, one of the social determinants of health, often goes unnoticed by those less affected by its pernicious effects. The lived social experience of race has been linked to significant physical and mental health disparities. Individually or together, we know that racism and discrimination are associated with poorer health of persons from racial minority groups as evidenced in higher rates of mortality, earlier onset of disease, greater severity and progression of disease and higher levels of comorbidity and impairment. These disparities are persistent over time and, although may lessen in degree, are evident at every level of income and education. This article provides a glimpse of the impact of racism on individuals and groups, with a focus on microaggressions as a subtle but pervasive form of racism, and how it is an underlying causative factor for health disparities.

Methodological guidance for the conduct of mixed methods systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to outline the updated methodological approach for conducting a JBI mixed methods systematic review with a focus on data synthesis, specifically, methods related to how data are combined and the overall integration of the quantitative and qualitative evidence. INTRODUCTION: Mixed methods systematic reviews provide a more complete basis for complex decision-making than that currently offered by single method reviews, thereby maximizing their usefulness to clinical and policy decision-makers. Although mixed methods systematic reviews are gaining traction, guidance regarding the methodology of combining quantitative and qualitative data is limited. In 2014, the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group developed guidance for mixed methods systematic reviews; however, since the introduction of this guidance, there have been significant developments in mixed methods synthesis. As such, the methodology group recognized the need to revise the guidance to align it with the current state of knowledge on evidence synthesis methodology. METHODS: Between 2015 and 2019, the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group undertook an extensive review of the literature, held annual face-to-face meetings (which were supplemented by teleconferences and regular email correspondence), sought advice from experts in the field, and presented at scientific conferences. This process led to the development of guidance in the form of a chapter in the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, the official guidance for conducting JBI systematic reviews. In 2019, the guidance was ratified by the JBI International Scientific Committee. RESULTS: The updated JBI methodological guidance for conducting a mixed methods systematic review recommends that reviewers take a convergent approach to synthesis and integration whereby the specific method utilized is dependent on the nature/type of questions that are posed in the systematic review. The JBI guidance is primarily based on Hong et al. and Sandelowski's typology on mixed methods systematic reviews. If the review question can be addressed by both quantitative and qualitative research designs, the convergent integrated approach should be followed, which involves data transformation and allows reviewers to combine quantitative and qualitative data. If the focus of the review is on different aspects or dimensions of a particular phenomenon of interest, the convergent segregated approach is undertaken, which involves independent synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data leading to the generation of quantitative and qualitative evidence, which are then integrated together. CONCLUSIONS: The updated guidance on JBI mixed methods systematic reviews provides foundational work to a rapidly evolving methodology and aligns with other seminal work undertaken in the field of mixed methods synthesis. Limitations to the current guidance are acknowledged, and a series of methodological projects identified by the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group to further refine the methodology are proposed. Mixed methods reviews offer an innovative framework for generating unique insights related to the complexities associated with health care quality and safety.

Impact of canine-assisted interventions on the health and well-being of older people residing in long-term care: a mixed methods systematic review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to synthesize and integrate the best available evidence on the impact of canine-assisted interventions on the health and well-being of older people residing in long-term care. INTRODUCTION: Canine-assisted interventions are commonly used as an adjunct therapy to enhance health and well-being, and are often implemented in long-term care facilities. The number of studies undertaken in this area has increased substantially over the previous five years; therefore, an update of two previous systematic reviews is warranted. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider older people who reside in long-term care facilities and who receive canine-assisted interventions. For the quantitative component, canine-assisted interventions will be compared to usual care, alternative therapeutic interventions, or no interventions, and outcomes will be grouped under the following headings: biological, psychological, and social. For the qualitative component, the experiences of older people receiving canine-assisted interventions, as well as the views of people directly or indirectly involved in delivering canine-assisted interventions, will be explored. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies published from 2009 to the present will be considered. METHODS: A search of 10 bibliographic databases and other resources for published and unpublished English language studies will be undertaken. Study selection, critical appraisal, data extraction, and data synthesis will be undertaken by two independent reviewers following the segregated JBI approach to mixed methods reviews. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020161235.

Experiences and perceptions of nurses working night shift: a qualitative systematic review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this qualitative systematic review is to examine the available evidence on the experiences of nurses working the night shift within any specialty in the acute care, subacute, or long-term care setting. INTRODUCTION: Nurses are required for round-the-clock patient care, and night shift nurses can experience detrimental effects as a result of their work hours. Understanding nurses' experiences when working night shift will facilitate the development of strategies to minimize the potential negative effects of working at night. In examining nurses' perceptions of working night shift, there is scope to explore how to improve night shift nurses' practice environment and job satisfaction, which will then translate to improved patient outcomes. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider qualitative studies that include registered nurses and licensed practical nurses who work night shift or rotate between day and night shift. Night supervisors and advanced practice nurses will be excluded due to the potential for dissimilar experiences and resources within those groups. The search will be limited to studies published in English from 1983 to the present. METHODS: The search strategy is designed to locate both published and unpublished qualitative studies by searching academic databases for published studies, gray literature, and hand searching reference lists. The study selection, critical appraisal, data extraction, and synthesis for this systematic review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of qualitative evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42019135294.

Methodological guidance for the conduct of mixed methods systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to outline the updated methodological approach for conducting a JBI mixed methods systematic review with a focus on data synthesis; specifically, methods related to how data are combined and the overall integration of the quantitative and qualitative evidence. INTRODUCTION: Mixed methods systematic reviews provide a more complete basis for complex decision-making than that currently offered by single method reviews, thereby maximizing their usefulness to clinical and policy decision-makers. Although mixed methods systematic reviews are gaining traction, guidance regarding the methodology of combining quantitative and qualitative data is limited. In 2014, the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group developed guidance for mixed methods systematic reviews; however, since the introduction of this guidance, there have been significant developments in mixed methods synthesis. As such, the methodology group recognized the need to revise the guidance to align it with the current state of knowledge on evidence synthesis methodology METHODS:: Between 2015 and 2019, the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group undertook an extensive review of the literature, held annual face-to-face meetings (which were supplemented by teleconferences and regular email correspondence), sought advice from experts in the field, and presented at scientific conferences. This process led to the development of guidance in the form of a chapter in the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, the official guidance for conducting JBI systematic reviews. In 2019, the guidance was ratified by the JBI International Scientific Committee. RESULTS: The updated JBI methodological guidance for conducting a mixed methods systematic review recommends that reviewers take a convergent approach to synthesis and integration whereby the specific method utilized is dependent on the nature/type of questions that are posed in the systematic review. The JBI guidance is primarily based on Hong et al. and Sandelowski's typology on mixed methods systematic reviews. If the review question can be addressed by both quantitative and qualitative research designs, the convergent integrated approach should be followed, which involves data transformation and allows reviewers to combine quantitative and qualitative data. If the focus of the review is on different aspects or dimensions of a particular phenomenon of interest, the convergent segregated approach is undertaken, which involves independent synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data leading to the generation of quantitative and qualitative evidence, which are then integrated together. CONCLUSIONS: The updated guidance on JBI mixed methods systematic reviews provides foundational work to a rapidly evolving methodology and aligns with other seminal work undertaken in the field of mixed methods synthesis. Limitations to the current guidance are acknowledged, and a series of methodological projects identified by the JBI Mixed Methods Review Methodology Group to further refine the methodology are proposed. Mixed methods reviews offer an innovative framework for generating unique insights related to the complexities associated with health care quality and safety.

Barriers and enablers to implementation of pressure injury prevention in hospitalized adults: a mixed methods systematic review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the proposed systematic review is to determine the barriers and enablers (or facilitators) to the implementation of pressure injury prevention among adults receiving care in the hospital setting. INTRODUCTION: Hospital-acquired pressure injuries are preventable; however, they remain an ongoing safety and quality health care concern in many countries. There are various evidence-based preventative interventions for pressure injuries, but their implementation in clinical practice is limited. An understanding of the different factors that support (enablers or facilitators) and inhibit (barriers) the implementation of these interventions from different perspectives is important, so that targeted strategies can be incorporated into implementation plans. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will include quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies that investigate barriers and/or enablers in relation to hospital-acquired pressure injury prevention in hospitalized adults. Only English publications will be considered, with no publication date restrictions. METHODS: The systematic review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for mixed methods systematic review. Published studies will be searched in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and Scopus. Gray literature will also be considered. Critical appraisal and data extraction will be performed using standardized tools, followed by data transformation. Data synthesis will follow the convergent integrated approach.

Experiences of multiple sclerosis patients with self-management of fatigue: a qualitative systematic review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to explore and synthesize the evidence on the experience of self-managing multiple sclerosis fatigue among adult patients. INTRODUCTION: Multiple sclerosis is a growing neurologic auto-immune disease, and fatigue is considered one of the most common and debilitating side effects. Understanding how multiple sclerosis patients experience fatigue, the cause of their fatigue, as well as how they self-manage their fatigue will better inform healthcare providers and patients. INCLUSION CRITERIA: The review will consider qualitative studies investigating the perceptions, experiences and meaning of fatigue associated with multiple sclerosis, the factors contributing to fatigue and the self-management strategies used to control fatigue in adults. Studies that include adult patients diagnosed with multiple sclerosis and experiencing fatigue, regardless of their participation in pharmacological interventions and non-pharmacological interventions, will be included. Any patients with multiple sclerosis residing in hospital-based care or residential in patient care will not be included. METHODS: A three-step search strategy will be utilized in this review. The initial step consists of a limited search in MEDLINE and CINAHL using "multiple sclerosis" and "fatigue" as search terms. Studies will be excluded if they have not been translated into English, but will not be limited by date. Each article will go through a preliminary review based on title and abstract to exclude any articles not pertaining to this study. After the search is completed, two reviewers will individually appraise retrieved qualitative studies for methodological quality prior to inclusion in the review. Findings will be pooled using meta-aggregation, and a ConQual Summary of Findings will be presented.

Experiences of compassion fatigue in direct care nurses: a qualitative systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to describe the experiences of direct care nurses with work-related compassion fatigue. INTRODUCTION: The cumulative demands of experiencing and helping others through suffering have been considered to contribute to the potential of compassion fatigue. However, there is a lack of clarity on what specifically contributes to and constitutes compassion fatigue. Nurses suffering from compassion fatigue experience physical and emotional symptoms that leave them disconnected from patients and focused on the technical rather than the compassionate components of their role. This disconnect can also affect personal relationships outside of work. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review included any qualitative studies describing the experiences of direct care nurses from any specialty or any nursing work setting. METHODS: This review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) approach for qualitative systematic reviews. Studies included in this review include those published in full text, English and between 1992, when the concept of compassion fatigue was first described, and May 2017, when the search was completed. The main databases searched for published and unpublished studies included: PubMed, CINAHL, Academic Search Premiere, Science Direct, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science and the Virginia Henderson Library. RESULTS: Twenty-three papers, representing studies conducted in seven countries and 821 total nurse participants, met the criteria for inclusion. From these, a total of 261 findings were extracted and combined to form 18 categories based on similarity in meaning, and four syntheses were derived: i) Central to the work of nursing and the professional environment in which nurses work are significant psychosocial stressors that contribute to compassion stress and, if left unchecked, can lead to compassion fatigue; ii) Protection against the stress of the work and professional environment necessitates that the individual and team learn how to respond to "the heat of the moment"; iii) Nurses and other administrative and colleague staff should be alert to the symptoms of compassion fatigue that present as profound, progressive, physical and emotional fatigue: a feeling that the nurse just can't go on and a sense of being disconnected and drained, like a gas tank on empty; and iv) Keeping compassion fatigue at bay requires awareness of the threat of compassion fatigue, symptoms of compassion fatigue, and the need for work-life balance and active self-care strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The major conclusions of this review are that compassion fatigue prevention and management must be acknowledged, and both personal and organizational coping strategies and adaptive responses are needed to keep nurses balanced, renewed and able to continue compassionate connection and caring.

Experiences of HIV-infected adults and healthcare providers with healthcare delivery practices that influence engagement in US primary healthcare settings: a qualitative systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: The human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) is a major public health problem that has claimed the lives of more than 34 million people worldwide. The health of people living with HIV (PLWH) is optimized by ongoing engagement in HIV care, yet many people living with HIV either do not enter or fall out of care. Access to care and ongoing engagement in care for antiretroviral (ARV) medication adherence and psychoeducational support are critical to achieving the desired outcomes of reducing the risk of further HIV transmission and HIV related morbidity and mortality, and managing other commonly co-occurring health, social and behavioral conditions, thereby maximizing wellness. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the review was to identify, evaluate and synthesize existing qualitative evidence on the experiences of HIV-infected adults with healthcare systems/practices/processes, and the experiences of healthcare providers with healthcare systems/practices/processes that impact engagement in primary healthcare settings in the United States (US). INCLUSION CRITERIA: The review included studies reporting on the qualitative experiences of HIV-infected adults, aged 18-65 years, with healthcare systems, practices and processes and their healthcare providers (physicians, nurses and others providing care to these patients in the primary care healthcare setting). Qualitative studies including but not limited to designs such as phenomenology, ethnography, grounded theory, action research and qualitative descriptive were included. Studies published in languages other than English and conducted outside of the US were excluded. METHODS: Using a three-step search strategy, databases of published and unpublished articles were searched from 1997 to 2017. All included studies were assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological quality, and data was extracted and pooled using the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI). Findings were rated according to their level of credibility, categorized based on similarity in meaning and subjected to a meta-synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 1038 qualitative articles were identified of which 41 were included after critical appraisal. Meta-synthesis generated four synthesized findings: i) What I want from my provider: to be a respectful, empathetic and holistic partner in my care; ii) I cannot do it alone: the critical importance of actively guiding and assisting patients during transitions and securing the needed resources; iii) Help me to understand my illness and care needs; iv) One-stop care that is de-stigmatizing and welcoming to diverse cultures keeps clients in care. These synthesized findings were derived from 243 study findings that were subsequently aggregated into 19 categories. Of the 243 study findings, 240 were rated unequivocal and three were rated credible. The overall ConQual for each of the four synthesized findings was moderate due to common dependability issues across the included studies. A total of 1597 participants were included. Only two studies were included from 1997 to 2000. The majority of included studies were published from 2005 to 2017. CONCLUSIONS: The synthesized findings illustrate clear quality indicators for primary care practice, emphasizing the patient-provider-care team partnership and shared decision making that is holistic, takes into account a patient's whole life, responsibilities and stressors, and reframes HIV associated misperceptions/myths. The review also highlights the importance of helping patients navigate and interact with the healthcare system by offering one-stop services that assist with multiple medical care needs and "wraparound" services that provide the needed care coordination to assist with critical quality of life needs such as food, housing, transportation, and assistance with applying for health insurance and medication.

Management of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment: An Overview.

It is important for nurses not working in the area of addictions to be informed of the diagnosis and treatment of opioid use disorder so that they may serve as a resource, educate others, and influence and refer individuals to seek treatment on the basis of best evidence. In this article, we provide an overview of the postscreening diagnosis and treatment of opioid use disorders with an emphasis on medication-assisted treatment, starting with the definition of substance use disorder, tolerance, dependence, and addiction.

A Population Health Approach to America's Opioid Epidemic.

The United States is in the midst of a nationwide public health emergency: an epidemic of opioid misuse and abuse that has been called the deadliest drug crisis in American history. This article reviews the current status of the opioid epidemic, the trends over the last 30-40 years that may have contributed to the epidemic, and a population health approach to addressing the epidemic. The epidemic is conceptualized from a population health perspective-an upstream and midstream perspective focusing on prevention and a downstream perspective targeting access to evidence-based interventions and maximizing health whether using or abstaining. Within the context of acute care, this approach will include patient screening for opioid use and other risk factors for addiction, use of opioid-sparing analgesics, and follow-up care that addresses pain and pain relief without opioids. For individuals who need addiction treatment, a gradualism philosophy is put forward. Gradualism recognizes the incremental nature of behavior change and recommends strategies to maximize health and functioning-through harm reduction-at all points along the journey to overcome addiction. Working within communities to address the broad factors that contribute to opioid-related substance use disorder is also essential.

The association between prenatal exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and childhood obesity: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the review was to determine if prenatal exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) increases the risk of obesity and overweight in children. INTRODUCTION: Childhood obesity has reached epidemic proportions in many developed countries. This is of great concern as childhood obesity is associated with early onset of chronic diseases such as coronary artery disease, type II diabetes and hypertension in adulthood. Extensive research suggests a multifactorial etiology. These factors include genetic markers, individual lifestyle, social and environmental factors, particularly the interaction between these factors. Among environmental factors, prenatal exposure to ETS has been linked to increased rates of obesity and overweight in childhood. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review considered studies on children of women who were non-smokers and who reported exposure to ETS during pregnancy. The exposure of interest was exposure to ETS or second hand smoke during pregnancy, determined by either: i) self-reported maternal exposure; and/or ii) serum cotinine levels. Observational studies such as cohort studies, case control studies, retrospective studies and analytical cross-sectional studies were included. Outcomes of interest were weight, height and body mass index of children from birth up to 18 years. METHODS: A three-step search strategy was used to search for published and unpublished studies in the English language. No search range (years) was set. Two reviewers assessed the studies for inclusion and methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI) standardized appraisal instruments. Data was extracted by two people independently and entered into the JBI extraction tool. Extracted data was pooled in a statistical meta-analysis based on a random effects model. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in the review. Eight of the studies were included in the final meta-analysis. Findings suggest that there was an association between prenatal exposure to ETS and childhood obesity (odds ratio [OR]: 1.905, CI: 1.23-2.94), and no association between ETS exposure and overweight (OR: 1.51, CI: 0.49-4.59). The high rates of heterogeneity between studies in both of the meta-analyses determined by the I statistic (97% and 99%, respectively) sanction caution in the interpretation and use of these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence, childhood obesity is associated with exposure to prenatal ETS, however overweight does not appear to be associated with this type of exposure.

Experiences and perceptions of physical restraint policies and practices by health professionals in the acute care sector: a qualitative systematic review protocol.

REVIEW QUESTION: What are the experiences and perceptions of physical restraint policies and practices by health professionals, administrators and policy makers in the acute care sector?

The patient/significant other experience of physical restraint in acute care settings: a qualitative systematic review protocol.

REVIEW QUESTION: The overarching question for this qualitative systematic review is: What meanings are attributed to the experience of physical restraint among adult patients or their significant others in acute care hospitals? Specifically the review will seek to answer two questions.

Experiences of HIV-infected adults and healthcare providers with healthcare delivery practices influencing engagement in primary healthcare settings: a qualitative systematic review protocol.

REVIEW QUESTION/OBJECTIVE: The objective of this qualitative systematic review is to examine the experience and impact of health care delivery on health care engagement for adults infected with the human immunodeficiency virus receiving primary care. This review will identify and synthesize the best available evidence on health care structures, processes and practices that promote patient engagement in primary health care.The review question to be addressed is: What are the experiences of people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLWH) and their health care providers with health care delivery processes and practices that impact engagement in primary health care settings (clinics, physician offices, and other community-based health care settings)? Specifically this review will compile evidence to illuminate health care system structures, provider practices, care delivery and programmatic processes that impact engagement in primary health care, as perceived by PLWH and their providers.