Identifying outcomes and outcome measures in neonatal family-centered care trials: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A wide range of outcomes for infants and parents has been reported in clinical trials testing FCC interventions. This systematic review aimed to identify outcomes, outcome measures, and time-points reported in experimental studies testing FCC interventions in neonatal care units. METHODS: This review included experimental studies investigating FCC interventions in neonatal settings. Database searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Scopus, JBI, Lilacs, and SciELO, completed in December 2022 and updated in November 2023. Critical appraisal was performed using the JBI checklist for randomized controlled trials, and a narrative synthesis process was used. Outcomes were categorized into the Comet Taxonomy core areas. RESULTS: The search identified 8787 papers; 42 studies were included in the analysis. Totally, 60 outcomes were identified: 42 infant and 18 parents' outcomes. Outcomes were clustered into 12 domains for infants and five domains for parents and measured by 97 outcome measures. The included studies reported 25 and 27 different time-points for infants and parents, respectively. CONCLUSION: This review of studies testing FCC interventions identified heterogeneity and inconsistency of outcomes, outcome measures, and time-points measuring the outcomes. Developing a core outcome set for FCC studies is warranted to benchmark the evidence and identify best-practices. IMPACT: This systematic review identified inconsistency of outcomes, outcome measures, and time-points reported in quantitative studies testing family-centered care interventions in neonatal care settings. The lack of standardized outcomes and outcome measures reported in clinical trials makes it difficult to synthesize data to provide conclusive recommendations. This systematic review will contribute to the development of a core outcome set for research testing family-centered care interventions in neonatal care settings.

Health sciences librarians' instructional engagement in continuing education: a scoping review.

Objective: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) have an ongoing need for continuing education (CE) while Health Science Librarians (HSLs), accustomed to supporting a range of learning needs in a variety of contexts, are well situated to provide CE that addresses information retrieval, literacy, management, and more. To better understand the extent of HSL delivered CE activities, we undertook a scoping review to determine how HSLs instruct practicing HCPs in support of their CE. Methods: We searched for published and unpublished literature sources including PubMed (NCBI), Embase (Elsevier); Dissertations and Theses Global (ProQuest); CINAHL (EBSCO); Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (EBSCO); and Library Literature and Information Science Full Text (EBSCO). To identify unpublished sources, we searched the internet using Google and contacted two health sciences library listservs. We also performed backwards and forwards searching of our included sources. Results: Our database searches yielded 4842 sources, and we retrieved an additional 579 sources through supplementary retrieval methods. After duplicate removal and screening, we included 105 sources in this review. The included sources were published between 1970 to 2021 and covered a range of topics such as searching methods and tools, critical appraisal, and many more. Those related to evidence-based practice (EBP) appeared around 2001 and bibliometrics and bioinformatics arose after 2016. Publications depicting HSLs teaching CE most commonly occurred in academic settings. The most common population taught was nurses, followed by physicians. Most sources did not report using an information literacy framework or instructional design model, undertaking needs assessments, or reporting formal objectives or assessment. Conclusion: While HSLs are active supporters of EBP, we need to apply the same principles to our own professional practice. Formal structure of programming and program assessment combined with clear, detailed reporting can help to build a more robust evidence base to support future CE provision.

Nursing-sensitive outcomes for the provision of pain management in pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to identify and map nursing-sensitive outcomes for the provision of pain management in pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities that are currently reported in the literature. INTRODUCTION: The experience of pain is highly individualized and subjective, with physiological, biochemical, and psychological differences contributing to pain perception. Pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities are at increased risk of ubiquitous pain exposure. Pain management effectiveness can be determined through the measurement of nursing-sensitive outcomes, which have not been mapped in the context of pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, and gray literature discussing nursing pain management in pediatric populations with intellectual disabilities will be included. No date limits will be applied. Only studies published in English will be considered. METHODS: This review will be guided by the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. The search strategy will aim to locate published and unpublished literature using the databases CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, PsycINFO (ProQuest), LILACS, SciELO, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Titles and abstracts, and then full-text studies, will be selected and reviewed by 2 independent researchers against the inclusion criteria. Content analysis using the NNQR-C, C-HOBIC, NDNQI, and Donabedian model frameworks will be used for data extraction and organization, accompanied by charted results and narrative summaries, as appropriate.

Strategies and indicators to integrate health equity in health service and delivery systems in high-income countries: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to describe how health service and delivery systems in high-income countries define and operationalize health equity. A secondary objective was to identify implementation strategies and indicators being used to integrate and measure health equity. INTRODUCTION: To improve the health of populations, a population health and health equity approach is needed. To date, most work on health equity integration has focused on reducing health inequities within public health, health care delivery, or providers within a health system, but less is known about integration across the health service and delivery system. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review included academic and gray literature sources that described the definitions, frameworks, level of integration, strategies, and indicators that health service and delivery systems in high-income countries have used to describe, integrate, and/or measure health equity. Sources were excluded if they were not available in English (or a translation was not available), were published before 1986, focused on strategies that were not implemented, did not provide health equity indicators, or featured strategies that were implemented outside the health service or delivery systems (eg, community-based strategies). METHODS: This review was conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility followed by a full-text review to determine inclusion. The information extracted from the included studies consisted of study design and key findings, such as health equity definitions, strategies, frameworks, level of integration, and indicators. Most data were quantitatively tabulated and presented according to 5 secondary review questions. Some findings (eg, definitions and indicators) were summarized using qualitative methods. Most findings were visually presented in charts and diagrams or presented in tabular format. RESULTS: Following review of 16,297 titles and abstracts and 824 full-text sources, we included 122 sources (108 scholarly and 14 gray literature) in this scoping review. We found that health equity was inconsistently defined and operationalized. Only 17 sources included definitions of health equity, and we found that both indicators and strategies lacked adequate descriptions. The use of health equity frameworks was limited and, where present, there was little consistency or agreement in their use. We found that strategies were often specific to programs, services, or clinics, rather than broadly applied across health service and delivery systems. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that strategies to advance health equity work are siloed within health service and delivery systems, and are not currently being implemented system-wide (ie, across all health settings). Healthy equity definitions and frameworks are varied in the included sources, and indicators for health equity are variable and inconsistently measured. Health equity integration needs to be prioritized within and across health service and delivery systems. There is also a need for system-wide strategies to promote health equity, alongside robust accountability mechanisms for measuring health equity. This is necessary to ensure that an integrated, whole-system approach can be consistently applied in health service and delivery systems internationally. REVIEW REGISTRATION: DalSpace dalspace.library.dal.ca/handle/10222/80835.

Long-term care home residents' experiences with socially assistive technologies and the effectiveness of these technologies: a mixed methods systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this review were to determine the effectiveness of socially assistive technologies for improving depression, loneliness, and social interaction among residents of long-term care (LTC) homes, and to explore the experiences of residents of LTC homes with socially assistive technologies. INTRODUCTION: Globally, the number of older adults (≥ 65 years) and the demand for LTC services are expected to increase over the next 30 years. Individuals within this population are at increased risk of experiencing depression, loneliness, and social isolation. The exploration of the extent to which socially assistive technologies may aid in improving loneliness and depression while supporting social interactions is essential to supporting a sustainable LTC sector. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This mixed methods systematic review included studies on the experiences of older adults in LTC homes using socially assistive technologies, as well as studies on the effectiveness of these technologies for improving depression, loneliness, and social interaction. Older adults were defined as people 65 years of age and older. We considered studies examining socially assistive technologies, such as computers, smart phones, tablets, and associated applications. METHODS: A JBI mixed methods convergent, segregated approach was used. CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, APA PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), and Scopus databases were searched on January 18, 2022, to identify published studies. The search for unpublished studies and gray literature included ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, Google, and the websites of professional organizations associated with LTC. No language or geographical restrictions were placed on the search. Titles, abstracts, and full texts of included studies were screened by 2 reviewers independently. Included studies underwent quality appraisal and data extraction. Quantitative and qualitative data findings were analyzed separately and then integrated. Where possible, quantitative data were synthesized using comparative meta-analyses with a fixed-effects model. RESULTS: From 12,536 records identified through the search, 14 studies were included. Quantitative (n=8), mixed methods (n=3), and qualitative (n=3) approaches were used in the included studies, with half (n=7) using quasi-experimental designs. All studies received moderate to high-quality appraisal scores. Comparative meta-analyses for depression and loneliness scores did not find any significant differences, and narrative findings were mixed. Qualitative meta-aggregation identified 1 synthesized finding (Matching technology functionality to user for enhanced well-being) derived from 2 categories (Enhanced sense of well-being, and Mismatch between technology and resident ability). CONCLUSIONS: Residents' experiences with socially assistive technologies, such as videoconferencing, encourage a sense of well-being, although quantitative findings related to depression and loneliness reported mixed impact. Residents experienced physical and cognitive challenges in learning to use the technology and required assistance. Future work should consider the unique needs of older adults and LTC home residents in the design and use of socially assistive technologies. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021279015.

Nursing interventions to improve care of people living with dementia in hospital: A mixed methods systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There are growing numbers of people living with dementia being admitted to acute care hospitals. Hospitalization for people living with dementia can be difficult and is often associated with negative outcomes. Nurses play a significant role in shaping the hospital experience of people living with dementia, and there have been efforts to design, implement and evaluate interventions to improve nursing care of people living with dementia. OBJECTIVE: To synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of, and experiences with, nursing interventions to improve care of hospitalized people living with dementia. DESIGN: Mixed methods systematic review following the JBI convergent segregated approach to synthesis and integration of findings. METHODS: The quantitative component considered studies that evaluated nursing interventions to improve the care of people living with dementia in hospital, comparing the intervention to usual care, other therapeutic modalities, or no comparator. The qualitative component considered studies that explored the experiences of nursing interventions from the perspectives of people living with dementia, caregivers, and nurses. A total of 8 databases were used to search for published and unpublished studies. Titles, abstracts, and full text selections were screened by two or more independent reviewers and assessed for methodological quality. RESULTS: A total of 38 studies were included in the review, 24 quantitative, 9 qualitative and 5 mixed method designs. Critical appraisal scores were moderate. All studies regardless of methodological quality were included in the review. Interventions were grouped as principally related to (1) dementia education for nurses, (2) technology, (3) nursing skills, and (4) physical environment. Outcomes are presented related to health outcomes of people living with dementia; nurses' knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy; and health system outcomes. As the interventions were heterogeneous, a meta-analysis of quantitative findings was not possible. The qualitative analysis incorporated 60 findings from 12 studies and led to nine categories and two synthesized findings recognizing external influences on nurses' practice with people living with dementia and the importance of interventions to humanize nurses' work with people living with dementia. Integration of the quantitative and qualitative results demonstrates the need to recognize the role of organization- and unit-level factors in the design and implementation of effective interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited high-quality evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of interventions to improve nursing care of people living with dementia in hospital. Using approaches to intervention design and implementation that draw on models of behavior change and learning health systems may support effective change. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO 2021CRD42021230951.