Experiences of interventions to reduce hospital stay for older adults following elective treatment: Qualitative evidence-synthesis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Hospitals streamline treatment pathways to reduce the length of time older adults admitted for planned procedures spend in hospital. However patient perspectives have been poorly evaluated. This systematic review aimed to understand the experiences of older patients, carers, families and staff of multi-component interventions intended to improve recovery following elective treatment. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Bibliographic databases searched in June 2021 included MEDLINE ALL, HMIC, CENTRAL, CINAHL, AMED and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. We conducted citation searching and examined reference lists of reviews. Two reviewers independently undertook screening and data extraction, resolving disagreements through discussion. We used an adapted Wallace checklist for quality appraisal and meta-ethnography to synthesise data. Clinician, carer and patient views were incorporated throughout the review. RESULTS: Thirty-five papers were included in the synthesis. Thirteen studies were conducted in the UK, with patient views the most frequently represented. We identified six overarching constructs: 'Home as preferred environment for recovery', 'Feeling safe', 'Individualisation of structured programme', 'Taking responsibility', 'Essential care at home' and 'Outcomes'. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings explore the support patients, families and carers need throughout hospital admission, and may inform commissioning of services to ensure patients and carers receive appropriate follow-up support after hospital discharge. The findings may help hospital and community-based health and social care staff provide person-centred care based upon assessments of emotional and physical wellbeing of patients and family/carers. Research is needed to establish a core-set of patient-reported outcome measures which capture aspects of recovery which are meaningful to patients.

Impact of interventions to improve recovery of older adults following planned hospital admission on quality-of-life following discharge: linked-evidence synthesis.

Objectives: To understand the impact of multicomponent interventions to improve recovery of older adults following planned hospital treatment, we conducted two systematic reviews, one of quantitative and one of qualitative evidence, and an overarching synthesis. These aimed to: • understand the effect of multicomponent interventions which aim to enhance recovery and/or reduce length of stay on patient-reported outcomes and health and social care utilisation • understand the experiences of patients, carers and staff involved in the delivery of interventions • understand how different aspects of the content and delivery of interventions may influence patient outcomes. Review methods: We searched bibliographic databases including MEDLINE ALL, Embase and the Health Management Information Consortium, CENTRAL, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, conducted forward and backward citation searching and examined reference lists of topically similar qualitative reviews. Bibliographic database searches were completed in May/June 2021 and updated in April 2022. We sought primary research from high-income countries regarding hospital inpatients with a mean/median age of minimum 60 years, undergoing planned surgery. Patients experienced any multicomponent hospital-based intervention to reduce length of stay or improve recovery. Quantitative outcomes included length of stay and any patient-reported outcome or experience or service utilisation measure. Qualitative research focused on the experiences of patients, carers/family and staff of interventions received. Quality appraisal was undertaken using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool or an adapted version of the Wallace checklist. We used random-effects meta-analysis to synthesise quantitative data where appropriate, meta-ethnography for qualitative studies and qualitative comparative analysis for the overarching synthesis. Results: Quantitative review: Included 125 papers. Forty-nine studies met criteria for further synthesis. Enhanced recovery protocols resulted in improvements to length of stay, without detriment to other outcomes, with minimal improvement in patient-reported outcome measures for patients admitted for lower-limb or colorectal surgery. Qualitative review: Included 43 papers, 35 of which were prioritised for synthesis. We identified six themes: 'Home as preferred environment for recovery', 'Feeling safe', 'Individualisation of structured programme', 'Taking responsibility', 'Essential care at home' and 'Outcomes'. Overarching synthesis: Intervention components which trigger successful interventions represent individualised approaches that allow patients to understand their treatment, ask questions and build supportive relationships and strategies to help patients monitor their progress and challenge themselves through early mobilisation. Discussion: Interventions to reduce hospital length of stay for older adults following planned surgery are effective, without detriment to other patient outcomes. Findings highlight the need to reconsider how to evaluate patient recovery from the perspective of the patient. Trials did not routinely evaluate patient mid- to long-term outcomes. Furthermore, when they did evaluate patient outcomes, reporting is often incomplete or conducted using a narrow range of patient-reported outcome measures or limited through asking the wrong people the wrong questions, with lack of longer-term evaluation. Findings from the qualitative and overarching synthesis will inform policy-making regarding commissioning and delivering services to support patients, carers and families before, during and after planned admission to hospital. Study registration: This trial is registered as PROSPERO registration number CRD42021230620. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 130576) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 23. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

More patients aged 60 or over need planned surgery. These patients are more likely to experience difficulties, such as urinary infections or falls, whilst in hospital, so should not spend more time in hospital than necessary. Hospitals use strategies that shorten hospital stay, but we do not know how older patients, or carers, feel about these, or whether they help patients recover in the long term. We wanted to know: how leaving hospital sooner affects how older patients feel and recover after planned surgery; how older patients, carers and staff feel about strategies designed to support older patients to go home earlier; which parts of these hospital care strategies work best? We brought together research about hospital care strategies that shorten the length of time older patients spend in hospital. We looked at patient questionnaires and interviews with patients, carers and hospital staff. Patients and carers helped us plan our research, understand our findings and consider who to share these with. hospital strategies to reduce hospital stay achieve this, without increasing risk of complications; information and follow-up care for patients and carers after discharge are essential; strategies which consider the individual needs of patients and help them understand their treatment, focus on their recovery goals and develop supportive relationships with staff were linked to better outcomes; lots of studies were excluded because they did not use patient questionnaires. Studies using questionnaires often focused on aspects of care delivered whilst patients were in hospital. Carers' voices were often overlooked. Research is needed to develop patient questionnaires to more fully capture the experiences of patients and carers and support hospitals to develop care strategies focused on the needs of individual patients and carers.

Consumption and effects of caffeinated energy drinks in young people: an overview of systematic reviews and secondary analysis of UK data to inform policy.

BACKGROUND: This overview and analysis of UK datasets was commissioned by the UK government to address concerns about children's consumption of caffeinated energy drinks and their effects on health and behaviour. METHODS: We searched nine databases for systematic reviews, published between 2013 and July 2021, in English, assessing caffeinated energy drink consumption by people under 18 years old (children). Two reviewers rated or checked risk of bias using AMSTAR2, and extracted and synthesised findings. We searched the UK Data Service for country-representative datasets, reporting children's energy-drink consumption, and conducted bivariate or latent class analyses. RESULTS: For the overview, we included 15 systematic reviews; six reported drinking prevalence and 14 reported associations between drinking and health or behaviour. AMSTAR2 ratings were low or critically low. Worldwide, across reviews, from 13% to 67% of children had consumed energy drinks in the past year. Only two of the 74 studies in the reviews were UK-based. For the dataset analysis, we identified and included five UK cross-sectional datasets, and found that 3% to 32% of children, across UK countries, consumed energy drinks weekly, with no difference by ethnicity. Frequent drinking (5 or more days per week) was associated with low psychological, physical, educational and overall well-being. Evidence from reviews and datasets suggested that boys drank more than girls, and drinking was associated with more headaches, sleep problems, alcohol use, smoking, irritability, and school exclusion. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) assessment suggests that the evidence is weak. CONCLUSIONS: Weak evidence suggests that up to a third of children in the UK consume caffeinated energy drinks weekly; and drinking 5 or more days per week is associated with some health and behaviour problems. Most of the evidence is from surveys, making it impossible to distinguish cause from effect. Randomised controlled trials are unlikely to be ethical; longitudinal studies could provide stronger evidence. PROSPERO REGISTRATIONS: CRD42018096292 - no deviations. CRD42018110498 - one deviation - a latent class analysis was conducted.

Older LGBT+ health inequalities in the UK: setting a research agenda.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans+ (LGBT+) people report poorer health than the general population and worse experiences of healthcare particularly cancer, palliative/end-of-life, dementia and mental health provision. This is attributable to: (a) social inequalities, including 'minority stress'; (b) associated health-risk behaviours (eg, smoking, excessive drug/alcohol use, obesity); (c) loneliness and isolation, affecting physical/mental health and mortality; (d) anticipated/experienced discrimination and (e) inadequate understandings of needs among healthcare providers. Older LGBT+ people are particularly affected, due to the effects of both cumulative disadvantage and ageing. There is a need for greater and more robust research data to support growing international and national government initiatives aimed at addressing these health inequalities. We identify seven key research strategies: (1) Production of large data sets; (2) Comparative data collection; (3) Addressing diversity and intersectionality among LGBT+ older people; (4) Investigation of healthcare services' capacity to deliver LGBT+ affirmative healthcare and associated education and training needs; (5) Identification of effective health promotion and/or treatment interventions for older LGBT+ people, and subgroups within this umbrella category; (6) Development of an (older) LGBT+ health equity model; (7) Utilisation of social justice concepts to ensure meaningful, change-orientated data production which will inform and support government policy, health promotion and healthcare interventions.