Interventions that have potential to help older adults living with social frailty: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The impact of social frailty on older adults is profound including mortality risk, functional decline, falls, and disability. However, effective strategies that respond to the needs of socially frail older adults are lacking and few studies have unpacked how social determinants operate or how interventions can be adapted during periods requiring social distancing and isolation such as the COVID-19 pandemic. To address these gaps, we conducted a scoping review using JBI methodology to identify interventions that have the best potential to help socially frail older adults (age ≥65 years). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL (EPSCO), EMBASE and COVID-19 databases and the grey literature. Eligibility criteria were developed using the PICOS framework. Our results were summarized descriptively according to study, patient, intervention and outcome characteristics. Data synthesis involved charting and categorizing identified interventions using a social frailty framework.  RESULTS: Of 263 included studies, we identified 495 interventions involving ~124,498 older adults who were mostly female. The largest proportion of older adults (40.5%) had a mean age range of 70-79 years. The 495 interventions were spread across four social frailty domains: social resource (40%), self-management (32%), social behavioural activity (28%), and general resource (0.4%). Of these, 189 interventions were effective for improving loneliness, social and health and wellbeing outcomes across psychological self-management, self-management education, leisure activity, physical activity, Information Communication Technology and socially assistive robot interventions. Sixty-three interventions were identified as feasible to be adapted during infectious disease outbreaks (e.g., COVID-19, flu) to help socially frail older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Our scoping review identified promising interventions with the best potential to help older adults living with social frailty.

Evaluation of an online arts-based platform to support the health and well-being of older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to conduct a formative evaluation of the Art Your Service (AYS) arts-based program to determine the program's potential for improving the social and physical well-being of older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: An online questionnaire was administered to the AYS members who consented to be invited to participate in the study. Questionnaire items consisted of a Likert scale and open-ended questions delivered using an online platform (SurveyMonkey). Participants provided feedback on their perceptions and experiences of the AYS program, such as its impact on their health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic, the benefits and challenges of participating, and any suggestions for program improvement. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (frequencies, means with standard deviations), and open-ended questions (qualitative data) were analyzed using content analysis. Outcomes included participant demographics, perceptions about the program, usability (System Usability Scale [SUS]), eHealth literacy (eHealth Literacy Scale), and social isolation (Lubben Social Network Scale; LSNS-6). RESULTS: Program participants revealed consistent patterns of their perceptions and experiences about the program, including a high satisfaction rate (95%) and a perceived positive impact on participants' health and well-being. The program sessions were perceived to be a well-organized, convenient, and safe way to engage with one another socially during the COVID-19 pandemic. The program usability was also perceived to be high (SUS mean score 86.2). Participants felt a sense of connectedness and had reduced feelings of social isolation. Most participants (75%) reported that the program improved their physical health. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this formative evaluation study identified key strengths and opportunities to improve the Art Your Service arts-based program, which can be used to help enhance the program's functioning and long-term sustainability potential.

Recommendations for supporting healthcare workers' psychological well-being: Lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Healthcare workers are at risk of adverse mental health outcomes due to occupational stress. Many organizations introduced initiatives to proactively support staff's psychological well-being in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. One example is the STEADY wellness program, which was implemented in a large trauma centre in Toronto, Canada. Program implementors engaged teams in peer support sessions, psychoeducation workshops, critical incident stress debriefing, and community-building initiatives. As part of a project designed to illuminate the experiences of STEADY program implementors, this article describes recommendations for future hospital wellness programs. Participants described the importance of having the hospital and its leaders engage in supporting staff's psychological well-being. They recommended ways of doing so (e.g., incorporating conversations about wellness in staff onboarding and routine meetings), along with ways to increase program uptake and sustainability (e.g., using technology to increase accessibility). Results may be useful in future efforts to bolster hospital wellness programming.

Clustering of Health Behaviors in Canadians: A Multiple Behavior Analysis of Data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging.

BACKGROUND: Health behaviors such as physical inactivity, unhealthy eating, smoking tobacco, and alcohol use are each leading risk factors for non-communicable chronic disease. Better understanding which behaviors tend to co-occur (i.e., cluster together) and co-vary (i.e., are correlated) may provide novel opportunities to develop more comprehensive interventions to promote multiple health behavior change. However, whether co-occurrence or co-variation-based approaches are better suited for this task remains relatively unknown. PURPOSE: To compare the utility of co-occurrence vs. co-variation-based approaches for understanding the interconnectedness between multiple health-impacting behaviors. METHODS: Using baseline and follow-up data (N = 40,268) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study of Aging, we examined the co-occurrence and co-variation of health behaviors. We used cluster analysis to group individuals based on their behavioral tendencies across multiple behaviors and to examine how these clusters are associated with demographic characteristics and health indicators. We compared outputs from cluster analysis to behavioral correlations and compared regression analyses of clusters and individual behaviors predicting future health outcomes. RESULTS: Seven clusters were identified, with clusters differentiated by six of the seven health behaviors included in the analysis. Sociodemographic characteristics varied across several clusters. Correlations between behaviors were generally small. In regression analyses individual behaviors accounted for more variance in health outcomes than clusters. CONCLUSIONS: Co-occurrence-based approaches may be more suitable for identifying sub-groups for intervention targeting while co-variation approaches are more suitable for building an understanding of the relationships between health behaviors.

Health behaviors such as physical inactivity, unhealthy eating, smoking tobacco, and alcohol use are each leading risk factors for non-communicable chronic disease. A better understanding of which behavioral combinations people engage in, and which behaviors are associated with each other, may provide new insights to support the development of interventions to promote multiple health behavior change. Using data with two time points (N = 40,268) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study of Aging, we grouped people into clusters based on their health behaviors and examined how these clusters are associated with demographic characteristics and health indicators. Seven clusters were identified with sociodemographic patterns evident across several clusters. Correlations between behaviors were generally small. We compared whether individual health behaviors, or groupings of people based on their health behaviors, were better predictors of future health outcomes. Individual behaviors were slightly better predictors of future health outcomes than clusters.

Assessing the sustainability and scalability of a diabetes eHealth innovation: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: To date, little is known about the sustainability and scalability of MyDiabetesPlan, an eHealth innovation designed to facilitate shared decision-making within diabetes care. To avoid the possibility of its short-lived implementation and promote wider adoption so as to promote patient-centred diabetes care, it is critical to understand MyDiabetesPlan's sustainability and scalability in order to ensure its long-term impact at a greater scale. We sought to identify the sustainability and scalability potential of MyDiabetesPlan and its limiting factors. METHODS: Using a concurrent triangulation mixed-methods approach, data were collected from 20 individuals involved in the development and implementation of MyDiabetesPlan. The National Health Services Sustainability Model (NHSSM) and the Innovation Scalability Self-administered Questionnaire (ISSaQ) were administered using a 'think-aloud' approach and subsequently, short semi-structured interviews were conducted. Mean aggregate scores and stakeholder-specific scores were generated for the NHSSM and ISSaQ, to quantitatively determine facilitating and limiting factors to sustainability and scalability. Content analysis occurred iteratively with qualitative data, to examine commonalities and differences with the quantitative findings. RESULTS: The top facilitating factor to sustaining MyDiabetesPlan was "Staff involvement and training to sustain the process.", whereas the top limiting factors were: "Adaptability of Improved Process", "Senior Leadership Engagement" and "Infrastructure for Sustainability". The top three facilitating factors for scale-up were "Acceptability", "Development with Theory" and "Consistency with Policy Directives." Conversely, the top three limiting factors were "Financial and Human Resources", "Achievable Adoption" and "Broad Reach". Qualitative findings corroborated the limiting/facilitating factors identified. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing staff involvement throughout the dynamic care contexts, and resource constraints impacting scale-up can enhance the sustainability and scalability of MyDiabetesPlan. As such, future plans will focus on garnering organizational leadership buy-in and support, which may address the resource constraints associated with sustainability and scalability and improve the capacity for adequate staff involvement. eHealth researchers will be able to prioritize these limiting factors from the outset of their tool development to purposefully optimize its sustainability and scalability performance.

Understanding low-value care and associated de-implementation processes: a qualitative study of Choosing Wisely Interventions across Canadian hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Choosing Wisely (CW) is an international movement comprised of campaigns in more than 20 countries to reduce low-value care (LVC). De-implementation, the reduction or removal of a healthcare practice that offers little to no benefit or causes harm, is an emerging field of research. Little is known about the factors which (i) sustain LVC; and (ii) the magnitude of the problem of LVC. In addition, little is known about the processes of de-implementation, and if and how these processes differ from implementation endeavours. The objective of this study was to explicate the myriad factors which impact the processes and outcomes of de-implementation initiatives that are designed to address national Choosing Wisely campaign recommendations. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals implementing Choosing Wisely Canada recommendations in healthcare settings in four provinces. The interview guide was developed using concepts from the literature and the Implementation Process Model (IPM) as a framework. All interviews were conducted virtually, recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Seventeen Choosing Wisely team members were interviewed. Participants identified numerous provider factors, most notably habit, which sustain LVC. Contrary to reporting in recent studies, the majority of LVC in the sample was not 'patient facing'; therefore, patients were not a significant driver for the LVC, nor a barrier to reducing it. Participants detailed aspects of the magnitude of the problems of LVC, providing insight into the complexities and nuances of harm, resources and prevalence. Harm from potential or common infections, reactions, or overtreatment was viewed as the most significant types of harm. Unique factors influencing the processes of de-implementation reported were: influence of Choosing Wisely campaigns, availability of data, lack of targets and hard-coded interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This study explicates factors ranging from those which impact the maintenance of LVC to factors that impact the success of de-implementation interventions intended to reduce them. The findings draw attention to the significance of unintentional factors, highlight the importance of understanding the impact of harm and resources to reduce LVC and illuminate the overstated impact of patients in de-implementation literature. These findings illustrate the complexities of de-implementation.

Development of an Implementation Process Model: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: There is general scarcity of research on key elements of implementation processes and the factors which impact implementation success. Implementation of healthcare interventions is a complex process. Tools to support implementation can facilitate this process and improve effectiveness of the interventions and clinical outcomes. Understanding the impact of implementation support tools is a critical aspect of this process. The objective of this study was to solicit knowledge and agreement from relevant implementation science and knowledge translation healthcare experts in order to develop a process model of key elements in the implementation process. METHODS: A two round, modified Delphi study involving international experts in knowledge translation and implementation (researchers, scientists, professors, decision-makers) was conducted. Participants rated and commented on all aspects of the process model, including the organization, content, scope, and structure. Delphi questions rated at 75% agreement or lower were reviewed and revised. Qualitative comments supported the restructuring and refinement. A second-round survey followed the same process as Round 1. RESULTS: Fifty-four experts participated in Round 1, and 32 experts participated in Round 2. Twelve percent (n = 6) of the Round 1 questions did not reach agreement. Key themes for revision and refinement were: stakeholder engagement throughout the process, iterative nature of the implementation process; importance of context; and importance of using guiding theories or frameworks. The process model was revised and refined based on the quantitative and qualitative data and reassessed by the experts in Round 2. Agreement was achieved on all items in Round 2 and the Delphi concluded. Additional feedback was obtained regarding terminology, target users and definition of the implementation process. CONCLUSIONS: High levels of agreement were attained for all sub-domains, elements, and sub-elements of the Implementation Process Model. This model will be used to develop an Implementation Support Tool to be used by healthcare providers to facilitate effective implementation and improved clinical outcomes.

Combining volunteers and primary care teamwork to support health goals and needs of older adults: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Health TAPESTRY (Health Teams Advancing Patient Experience: STRengthening QualitY) intervention was designed to improve primary care teamwork and promote optimal aging. We evaluated the effectiveness of Health TAPESTRY in attaining goals of older adults (e.g., physical activity, productivity, social connection, medical status) and other outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial between January and October 2015 in a primary care practice in Hamilton, Ontario. Older adults were randomized (1:1) to Health TAPESTRY (n = 158) or control (n = 154). Trained community volunteers gathered information on people's goals, needs and risks in their homes, using electronic forms. Interprofessional primary care teams reviewed summaries and addressed issues. Participants reported goal attainment (primary outcome), self-efficacy, quality of life, optimal aging, social support, empowerment, physical activity, falls, and access to and comprehensiveness of the health system. We determined use of health care resources through chart audit. RESULTS: There were no differences between groups in goal attainment or many other patient-reported outcome and experience assessments at 6 months. More primary care visits took place in the intervention versus control group over 6 months (mean ± standard deviation [SD] 4.93 ± 3.86 v. 3.50 ± 3.53; difference of 1.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 2.19]). The odds of having 1 or more hospital admission were lower for the intervention group (odds ratio [OR] 0.44 [95% CI 0.20 to 0.95]). INTERPRETATION: Health TAPESTRY did not improve the primary outcome of goal attainment but showed signals of shifting care from reactive to active preventive care. Further evaluation will help in understanding effective components, costs and consequences of the intervention. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02283723.

Patient preferences for a touch screen tablet-based asthma questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of asthma control and provision of asthma action plans are seldom performed in practice, partly due to limited time for physicians to ascertain required information. A patient-facing electronic asthma questionnaire could facilitate information collection. We sought to design a touch-tablet asthma questionnaire for use in the clinic waiting room and to describe patient preferences for the content of such a questionnaire. METHODS: We created a questionnaire prototype based on best evidence and employed rapid-cycle design (semi-structured focus group testing; analysis; corresponding modifications and re-testing) with asthma patients aged ≥16 years. We analyzed transcripts using deductive and inductive content analysis. Quantitative measures included Likert-scale questions and questionnaire completion times. RESULTS: There were 20 participants across five focus groups (15/20 (75%) female, age 49.1 ± 15.6 years). Content-related themes included: 1) comprehensibility (language) (how questionnaire language affected ease and accuracy of comprehension) and b) information collection (issues arising during information collection in the following identified subthemes: personal asthma symptoms and triggers; asthma control; asthma medications and contact information). Average questionnaire completion time was 11.7 ± 5.9 min. Summative Likert scale responses suggested high levels of question comprehension and confidence with responses. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis provides novel insight about how best to formulate and present asthma-related content in an electronic questionnaire. Such questionnaires might facilitate quality improvement by improving efficiency of data collection, enabling better assessment of asthma control and medication adherence, and personalization of asthma action plans. Future studies should measure real-world uptake of such a questionnaire and impact on care.

Health TAPESTRY: co-designing interprofessional primary care programs for older adults using the persona-scenario method.

BACKGROUND: Working with patients and health care providers to co-design health interventions is gaining global prominence. While co-design of interventions is important for all patients, it is particularly important for older adults who often experience multiple and complex chronic conditions. Persona-scenarios have been used by designers of technology applications. The purpose of this paper is to explore how a modified approach to the persona-scenario method was used to co-design a complex primary health care intervention (Health TAPESTRY) by and for older adults and providers and the value added of this approach. METHODS: The persona-scenario method involved patient and clinician participants from two academically-linked primary care practices. Local prospective volunteers and community service providers (e.g., home care services, support services) were also recruited. Persona-scenario workshops were facilitated by researchers experienced in qualitative methods. Working mostly in homogenous pairs, participants created a fictitious but authentic persona that represented people like themselves. Core components of the Health TAPESTRY intervention were described. Then, participants created a story (scenario) involving their persona and an aspect of the proposed Health TAPESTRY program (e.g., volunteer roles). Two stages of analysis involved descriptive identification of themes, followed by an interpretive phase to extract possible actions and products related to ideas in each theme. RESULTS: Fourteen persona-scenario workshops were held involving patients (n = 15), healthcare providers/community care providers (n = 29), community service providers (n = 12), and volunteers (n = 14). Fifty themes emerged under four Health TAPESTRY components and a fifth category - patient. Eight cross cutting themes highlighted areas integral to the intervention. In total, 414 actions were identified and 406 products were extracted under the themes, of which 44.8% of the products (n = 182) were novel. The remaining 224 had been considered by the research team. CONCLUSIONS: The persona-scenario method drew out feasible novel ideas from stakeholders, which expanded on the research team's original ideas and highlighted interactions among components and stakeholder groups. Many ideas were integrated into the Health TAPESTRY program's design and implementation. Persona-scenario method added significant value worthy of the added time it required. This method presents a promising alternative to active engagement of multiple stakeholders in the co-design of complex interventions.

Effectiveness of interventions for managing multiple high-burden chronic diseases in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: More than half of older adults (age ≥ 65 yr) have 2 or more high-burden multimorbidity conditions (i.e., highly prevalent chronic diseases, which are associated with increased health care utilization; these include diabetes [DM], dementia, depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], cardiovascular disease [CVD], arthritis, and heart failure [HF]), yet most existing interventions for managing chronic disease focus on a single disease or do not respond to the specialized needs of older adults. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify effective multimorbidity interventions compared with a control or usual care strategy for older adults. METHODS: We searched bibliometric databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions for managing multiple chronic diseases in any language from 1990 to December 2017. The primary outcome was any outcome specific to managing multiple chronic diseases as reported by studies. Reviewer pairs independently screened citations and full-text articles, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We assessed statistical and methodological heterogeneity and performed a meta-analysis of RCTs with similar interventions and components. RESULTS: We included 25 studies (including 15 RCTs and 6 cluster RCTs) (12 579 older adults; mean age 67.3 yr). In patients with [depression + COPD] or [CVD + DM], care-coordination strategies significantly improved depressive symptoms (standardized mean difference -0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.59 to -0.22; I2 = 0%) and reduced glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels (mean difference -0.51; 95% CI -0.90 to -0.11; I2 = 0%), but not mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.79; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.17; I2 = 0%). Among secondary outcomes, care-coordination strategies reduced functional impairment in patients with [arthritis + depression] (between-group difference -0.82; 95% CI -1.17 to -0.47) or [DM + depression] (between-group difference 3.21; 95% CI 1.78 to 4.63); improved cognitive functioning in patients with [DM + depression] (between-group difference 2.44; 95% CI 0.79 to 4.09) or [HF + COPD] (p = 0.006); and increased use of mental health services in those with [DM + (CVD or depression)] (RR 2.57; 95% CI 1.90 to 3.49; I2 = 0%). INTERPRETATION: Subgroup analyses showed that older adults with diabetes and either depression or cardiovascular disease, or with coexistence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and heart failure, can benefit from care-coordination strategies with or without education to lower HbA1c, reduce depressive symptoms, improve health-related functional status, and increase the use of mental health services. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO-CRD42014014489.

Supporting the implementation of stroke quality-based procedures (QBPs): a mixed methods evaluation to identify knowledge translation activities, knowledge translation interventions, and determinants of implementation across Ontario.

BACKGROUND: In 2013, Health Quality Ontario introduced stroke quality-based procedures (QBPs) to promote use of evidence-based practices for patients with stroke in Ontario hospitals. The study purpose was to: (a) describe the knowledge translation (KT) interventions used to support stroke QBP implementation, (b) assess differences in the planned and reported KT interventions by region, and (c) explore determinants perceived to have affected outcomes. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate: activities, KT interventions, and determinants of stroke QBP implementation. In Phase 1, a document review of regional stroke network work plans was conducted to capture the types of KT activities planned at a regional level; these were mapped to the knowledge to action framework. In Phase 2, we surveyed Ontario hospital staff to identify the KT interventions used to support QBP implementation at an organizational level. Phase 3 involved qualitative interviews with staff to elucidate deeper understanding of survey findings. RESULTS: Of the 446 activities identified in the document review, the most common were 'dissemination' (24.2%; n = 108), 'implementation' (22.6%; n = 101), 'implementation planning' (15.0%; n = 67), and 'knowledge tools' (10.5%; n = 47). Based on survey data (n = 489), commonly reported KT interventions included: staff educational meetings (43.1%; n = 154), champions (41.5%; n = 148), and staff educational materials (40.6%; n = 145). Survey participants perceived stroke QBP implementation to be successful (median = 5/7; interquartile range = 4-6; range = 1-7; n = 335). Forty-four people (e.g., managers, senior leaders, regional stroke network representatives, and frontline staff) participated in interviews/focus groups. Perceived facilitators to QBP implementation included networks and collaborations with external organizations, leadership engagement, and hospital prioritization of stroke QBP. Perceived barriers included lack of funding, size of the hospital (i.e., too small), lack of resources (i.e., staff and time), and simultaneous implementation of other QBPs. CONCLUSIONS: Information on the types of activities and KT interventions used to support stroke QBP implementation and the key determinants influencing uptake of stroke QBPs can be used to inform future activities including the development and evaluation of interventions to address barriers and leverage facilitators.

Protocol for a Delphi consensus exercise to identify a core set of criteria for selecting health related outcome measures (HROM) to be used in primary health care.

BACKGROUND: Promoting the collection and use of health related outcome measures (HROM) in daily practice has long been a goal for improving and assessing the effectiveness of care provided to patients. However, there has been a lack of consensus on what criteria to use to select outcomes or instruments, particularly in the context of primary health care settings where patients present with multiple concurrent health conditions and interventions are whole-health and person-focused. The purpose of this proposed study is to undertake a formal consensus exercise to establish criteria for selecting HROM (including patient-reported (PRO or PROM), observer-reported (ObsR)), clinician-reported (ClinRO) and performance related outcomes (PerfO) for use in shared decision-making, or in assessing, screening or monitoring health status in primary health care settings. METHODS: A Delphi consensus online survey will be developed. Criteria for the Delphi panel participants to consider were selected from a targeted literature search. These initial criteria (n = 35) were grouped into four categories within which items will be presented in the Delphi survey, with the option to suggest additional items. Panel members invited to participate will include primary health care practitioners and administrators, policy-makers, researchers, and experts in HROM development; patients will be excluded. Standard Delphi methodology will be employed with an expectation of at least 3 rounds to achieve consensus (75% agreement). As the final list of criteria for selecting HROM emerges, panel members will be asked to provide opinions about potential weighting of items. The Delphi survey was approved by the Ethics Committee in the Faculty of Health Sciences at McMaster University. DISCUSSION: Previous literature establishing criteria for selecting HROM were developed with a focus on patient reported outcomes, psychological/ behavioural outcomes or outcomes for minimum core outcome sets in clinical trials. Although helpful, these criteria may not be applicable and feasible for application in a primary health care context where patients with multi-morbidity and complex interventions are typical and the constraints of providing health services differ from those in research studies. The findings from this Delphi consensus study will address a gap for establishing consensus on criteria for selecting HROM for use across primary health care settings.

Sustainability and scalability of a volunteer-based primary care intervention (Health TAPESTRY): a mixed-methods analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic diseases are a significant public health concern, particularly in older adults. To address the delivery of health care services to optimally meet the needs of older adults with multiple chronic diseases, Health TAPESTRY (Teams Advancing Patient Experience: Strengthening Quality) uses a novel approach that involves patient home visits by trained volunteers to collect and transmit relevant health information using e-health technology to inform appropriate care from an inter-professional healthcare team. Health TAPESTRY was implemented, pilot tested, and evaluated in a randomized controlled trial (analysis underway). Knowledge translation (KT) interventions such as Health TAPESTRY should involve an investigation of their sustainability and scalability determinants to inform further implementation. However, this is seldom considered in research or considered early enough, so the objectives of this study were to assess the sustainability and scalability potential of Health TAPESTRY from the perspective of the team who developed and pilot-tested it. METHODS: Our objectives were addressed using a sequential mixed-methods approach involving the administration of a validated, sustainability survey developed by the National Health Service (NHS) to all members of the Health TAPESTRY team who were actively involved in the development, implementation and pilot evaluation of the intervention (Phase 1: n = 38). Mean sustainability scores were calculated to identify the best potential for improvement across sustainability factors. Phase 2 was a qualitative study of interviews with purposively selected Health TAPESTRY team members to gain a more in-depth understanding of the factors that influence the sustainability and scalability Health TAPESTRY. Two independent reviewers coded transcribed interviews and completed a multi-step thematic analysis. Outcomes were participant perceptions of the determinants influencing the sustainability and scalability of Health TAPESTRY. RESULTS: Twenty Health TAPESTRY team members (53% response rate) completed the NHS sustainability survey. The overall mean sustainability score was 64.6 (range 22.8-96.8). Important opportunities for improving sustainability were better staff involvement and training, clinical leadership engagement, and infrastructure for sustainability. Interviews with 25 participants (response rate 60%) showed that factors influencing the sustainability and scalability of Health TAPESTRY emerged across two dimensions: I) Health TAPESTRY operations (development and implementation activities undertaken by the central team); and II) the Health TAPESTRY intervention (factors specific to the intervention and its elements). Resource capacity appears to be an important factor to consider for Health TAPESTRY operations as it was identified across both sustainability and scalability factors; and perceived lack of interprofessional team and volunteer resource capacity and the need for stakeholder buy-in are important considerations for the Health TAPESTRY intervention. We used these findings to create actionable recommendations to initiate dialogue among Health TAPESTRY team members to improve the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified sustainability and scalability determinants of the Health TAPESTRY intervention that can be used to optimize its potential for impact. Next steps will involve using findings to inform a guide to facilitate sustainability and scalability of Health TAPESTRY in other jurisdictions considering its adoption. Our findings build on the limited current knowledge of sustainability, and advances KT science related to the sustainability and scalability of KT interventions.

Identifying Effective Nurse-Led Care Transition Interventions for Older Adults With Complex Needs Using a Structured Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: Nursing plays a central role in facilitating care transitions for complex older adults, yet there is no consensus of the components of nurse-led care transitions interventions to facilitate high quality care transitions among complex older adults. A structured expert panel was established with the purpose of identifying effective nurse-led care transition interventions. METHODS: A modified Delphi consensus technique based on the RAND method was employed. Panelists (n = 23) were asked to individually rate a series of statements derived from a realist synthesis of the literature for relevance, feasibility and likely impact. Statements receiving an aggregate score of ≥75% (7/9) were reviewed and revised at a face-to-face consensus meeting. A second round of rating following the same process as round one was used, followed by a final ranking of the statements. RESULTS: The five highest ranked intervention components and contextual factors were: (a) educating and coaching patients, their family members and caregivers about self-management skills; (b) ensuring patients, their family members and caregivers are aware of follow-up medical appointments and postdischarge care plan; (c) using standardized documentation tools and comprehensive communication strategies during care transitions; (d) optimizing nurses' roles and scopes of practice across the care transitions spectrum; and (e) having strong leadership, strategic alignment and accountability structures in organizations to enable quality care transitions for the complex older person population. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Key insights on optimizing the nurses' roles and scope of practice during care transitions included having nurses provide "warm hand-offs" and serve as the "go-to person." The panel also identified current challenges to optimizing the nurses' roles and scope of practice across care transition points. Future research is required to determine effective nurse-led intervention components and in which context do they work or do not.

A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews.

BACKGROUND: Scoping reviews are used to identify knowledge gaps, set research agendas, and identify implications for decision-making. The conduct and reporting of scoping reviews is inconsistent in the literature. We conducted a scoping review to identify: papers that utilized and/or described scoping review methods; guidelines for reporting scoping reviews; and studies that assessed the quality of reporting of scoping reviews. METHODS: We searched nine electronic databases for published and unpublished literature scoping review papers, scoping review methodology, and reporting guidance for scoping reviews. Two independent reviewers screened citations for inclusion. Data abstraction was performed by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Quantitative (e.g. frequencies of methods) and qualitative (i.e. content analysis of the methods) syntheses were conducted. RESULTS: After searching 1525 citations and 874 full-text papers, 516 articles were included, of which 494 were scoping reviews. The 494 scoping reviews were disseminated between 1999 and 2014, with 45% published after 2012. Most of the scoping reviews were conducted in North America (53%) or Europe (38%), and reported a public source of funding (64%). The number of studies included in the scoping reviews ranged from 1 to 2600 (mean of 118). Using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology guidance for scoping reviews, only 13% of the scoping reviews reported the use of a protocol, 36% used two reviewers for selecting citations for inclusion, 29% used two reviewers for full-text screening, 30% used two reviewers for data charting, and 43% used a pre-defined charting form. In most cases, the results of the scoping review were used to identify evidence gaps (85%), provide recommendations for future research (84%), or identify strengths and limitations (69%). We did not identify any guidelines for reporting scoping reviews or studies that assessed the quality of scoping review reporting. CONCLUSION: The number of scoping reviews conducted per year has steadily increased since 2012. Scoping reviews are used to inform research agendas and identify implications for policy or practice. As such, improvements in reporting and conduct are imperative. Further research on scoping review methodology is warranted, and in particular, there is need for a guideline to standardize reporting.

The development of a guideline implementability tool (GUIDE-IT): a qualitative study of family physician perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The potential of clinical practice guidelines has not been realized due to inconsistent adoption in clinical practice. Optimising intrinsic characteristics of guidelines (e.g., its wording and format) that are associated with uptake (as perceived by their end users) may have potential. Using findings from a realist review on guideline uptake and consultation with experts in guideline development, we designed a conceptual version of a future tool called Guideline Implementability Tool (GUIDE-IT). The tool will aim to involve family physicians in the guideline development process by providing a process to assess draft guideline recommendations. This feedback will then be given back to developers to consider when finalizing the recommendations. As guideline characteristics are best assessed by end-users, the objectives of the current study were to explore how family physicians perceive guideline implementability, and to determine what components should comprise the final GUIDE-IT prototype. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with family physicians in Toronto, Ontario. Two experienced investigators conducted one-hour interviews with family physicians using a semi-structured interview guide to 1) elicit feedback on perceptions on guideline implementability; 2) to generate a discussion in response to three draft recommendations; and 3) to provide feedback on the conceptual GUIDE-IT. Sessions were audio taped and transcribed verbatim. Data collection and analysis were guided by content analyses. RESULTS: 20 family physicians participated. They perceived guideline uptake according to facilitators and barriers across 6 categories of guideline implementability (format, content, language, usability, development, and the practice environment). Participants' feedback on 3 draft guideline recommendations were grouped according to guideline perception, cognition, and agreement. When asked to comment on GUIDE-IT, most respondents believed that the tool would be useful, but urged to involve "regular" or community family physicians in the process, and suggested that an online system would be the most efficient way to deliver it. CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified facilitators and barriers of guideline implementability from the perspective of community and academic family physicians that will be used to build our GUIDE-IT prototype. Our findings build on current knowledge by showing that family physicians perceive guideline uptake mostly according to factors that are in the control of guideline developers.

Guidelines and recommendations about virtual mental health services from high-income countries: a rapid review.

OBJECTIVES: This study reviewed existing recommendations for virtual mental healthcare services through the quadruple aim framework to create a set of recommendations on virtual healthcare delivery to guide the development of Canadian policies on virtual mental health services. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic rapid review with qualitative content analysis of data from included manuscripts. The quadruple aim framework, consisting of improving patient experience and provider satisfaction, reducing costs and enhancing population health, was used to analyse and organise findings. METHODS: Searches were conducted using seven databases from 1 January 2010 to 22 July 2022. We used qualitative content analysis to generate themes. RESULTS: The search yielded 40 articles. Most articles (85%) discussed enhancing patient experiences, 55% addressed provider experiences and population health, and 25% focused on cost reduction. Identified themes included: screen patients for appropriateness of virtual care; obtain emergency contact details; communicate transparently with patients; improve marginalised patients' access to care; support health equity for all patients; determine the cost-effectiveness of virtual care; inform patients of insurance coverage for virtual care services; increase provider training for virtual care and set professional boundaries between providers and patients. CONCLUSIONS: This rapid review identified important considerations that can be used to advance virtual care policy to support people living with mental health conditions in a high-income country.