Trial of an Intervention to Improve Acute Heart Failure Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute heart failure are frequently or systematically hospitalized, often because the risk of adverse events is uncertain and the options for rapid follow-up are inadequate. Whether the use of a strategy to support clinicians in making decisions about discharging or admitting patients, coupled with rapid follow-up in an outpatient clinic, would affect outcomes remains uncertain. METHODS: In a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial conducted in Ontario, Canada, we randomly assigned 10 hospitals to staggered start dates for one-way crossover from the control phase (usual care) to the intervention phase, which involved the use of a point-of-care algorithm to stratify patients with acute heart failure according to the risk of death. During the intervention phase, low-risk patients were discharged early (in ≤3 days) and received standardized outpatient care, and high-risk patients were admitted to the hospital. The coprimary outcomes were a composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes within 30 days after presentation and the composite outcome within 20 months. RESULTS: A total of 5452 patients were enrolled in the trial (2972 during the control phase and 2480 during the intervention phase). Within 30 days, death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes occurred in 301 patients (12.1%) who were enrolled during the intervention phase and in 430 patients (14.5%) who were enrolled during the control phase (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 0.99; P = 0.04). Within 20 months, the cumulative incidence of primary-outcome events was 54.4% (95% CI, 48.6 to 59.9) among patients who were enrolled during the intervention phase and 56.2% (95% CI, 54.2 to 58.1) among patients who were enrolled during the control phase (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.99). Fewer than six deaths or hospitalizations for any cause occurred in low- or intermediate-risk patients before the first outpatient visit within 30 days after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute heart failure who were seeking emergency care, the use of a hospital-based strategy to support clinical decision making and rapid follow-up led to a lower risk of the composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes within 30 days than usual care. (Funded by the Ontario SPOR Support Unit and others; COACH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02674438.).

Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Various studies have demonstrated gender disparities in workplace settings and the need for further intervention. This study identifies and examines evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions examining gender equity in workplace or volunteer settings. An additional aim was to determine whether interventions considered intersection of gender and other variables, including PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (e.g., race/ethnicity). METHODS: Scoping review conducted using the JBI guide. Literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, PAIS Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database from inception to May 9, 2022, with an updated search on October 17, 2022. Results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance, Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist, and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist. All employment or volunteer sectors settings were included. Included interventions were designed to promote workplace gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals, (b) organizations, or (c) systems. Any comparator was eligible. Outcomes measures included any gender equity related outcome, whether it was measuring intervention effectiveness (as defined by included studies) or implementation. Data analyses were descriptive in nature. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews, only high-level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework. RESULTS: We screened 8855 citations, 803 grey literature sources, and 663 full-text articles, resulting in 24 unique RCTs and one companion report that met inclusion criteria. Most studies (91.7%) failed to report how they established sex or gender. Twenty-three of 24 (95.8%) studies reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus variable: typically sex or gender or occupation. Two RCTs (8.3%) identified a non-binary gender identity. None of the RCTs reported on relationships between gender and other characteristics (e.g., disability, age, etc.). We identified 24 gender equity promoting interventions in the workplace that were evaluated and categorized into one or more of the following themes: (i) quantifying gender impacts; (ii) behavioural or systemic changes; (iii) career flexibility; (iv) increased visibility, recognition, and representation; (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship, and sponsorship; and (vi) financial support. Of these interventions, 20/24 (83.3%) had positive conclusion statements for their primary outcomes (e.g., improved academic productivity, increased self-esteem) across heterogeneous outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. While some interventions elicited positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, standardized outcome measures considering specific contexts and cultures are required. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/x8yae .

New horizons in clinical practice guidelines for use with older people.

Globally, more people are living into advanced old age, with age-associated frailty, disability and multimorbidity. Achieving equity for all ages necessitates adapting healthcare systems. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have an important place in adapting evidence-based medicine and clinical care to reflect these changing needs. CPGs can facilitate better and more systematic care for older people. But they can also present a challenge to patient-centred care and shared decision-making when clinical and/or socioeconomic heterogeneity or personal priorities are not reflected in recommendations or in their application. Indeed, evidence is often lacking to enable this variability to be reflected in guidance. Evidence is more likely to be lacking about some sections of the population. Many older adults are at the intersection of many factors associated with exclusion from traditional clinical evidence sources with higher incidence of multimorbidity and disability compounded by poorer healthcare access and ultimately worse outcomes. We describe these challenges and illustrate how they can adversely affect CPG scope, the evidence available and its summation, the content of CPG recommendations and their patient-centred implementation. In all of this, we take older adults as our focus, but much of what we say will be applicable to other marginalised groups. Then, using the established process of formulating a CPG as a framework, we consider how these challenges can be mitigated, with particular attention to applicability and implementation. We consider why CPG recommendations on the same clinical areas may be inconsistent and describe approaches to ensuring that CPGs remain up to date.

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.

Development and usability testing of an online support tool to identify models and frameworks to inform implementation.

BACKGROUND: Theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) are useful when implementing, evaluating and sustaining healthcare evidence-based interventions. Yet it can be challenging to identify an appropriate TMF for an implementation project. We developed and tested the usability of an online tool to help individuals who are doing or supporting implementation practice activities to identify appropriate models and/or frameworks to inform their work. METHODS: We used methods guided by models and evidence on implementation science and user-centered design. Phases of tool development included applying findings from a scoping review of TMFs and interviews with 24 researchers/implementers on barriers and facilitators to identifying and selecting TMFs. Based on interview findings, we categorized the TMFs by aim, stage of implementation, and target level of change to inform the tool's algorithm. We then conducted interviews with 10 end-users to test the usability of the prototype tool and administered the System Usability Scale (SUS). Usability issues were addressed and incorporated into the tool. RESULTS: We developed Find TMF, an online tool consisting of 3-4 questions about the user's implementation project. The tool's algorithm matches key characteristics of the user's project (aim, stage, target change level) with characteristics of different TMFs and presents a list of candidate models/frameworks. Ten individuals from Canada or Australia participated in usability testing (mean SUS score 84.5, standard deviation 11.4). Overall, participants found the tool to be simple, easy to use and visually appealing with a useful output of candidate models/frameworks to consider for an implementation project. Users wanted additional instruction and guidance on what to expect from the tool and how to use the information in the output table. Tool improvements included incorporating an overview figure outlining the tool steps and output, displaying the tool questions on a single page, and clarifying the available functions of the results page, including adding direct links to the glossary and to complementary tools. CONCLUSIONS: Find TMF is an easy-to-use online tool that may benefit individuals who support implementation practice activities by making the vast number of models and frameworks more accessible, while also supporting a consistent approach to identifying and selecting relevant TMFs.

A systematic review of the efficacy and safety of turmeric in the treatment of digestive disorders.

Turmeric has been gaining popularity as a treatment option for digestive disorders, although a rigorous synthesis of efficacy has not been conducted. This study aimed to summarize the evidence for the efficacy and safety of turmeric in the treatment of digestive disorders, including inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), dyspepsia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and peptic ulcers. Literature searches were conducted in Medline, EMBASE, AMED, the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials, and Dissertation Abstracts from inception to November 15, 2021. Dual independent screening of citations and full texts was conducted and studies meeting inclusion criteria were retained: randomized controlled trials (RCT) and comparative observational studies evaluating turmeric use in people of any age with one of the digestive disorders of interest. Extraction of relevant data and risk of bias assessments were performed by two reviewers independently. Meta-analysis was not conducted due to high heterogeneity. From 1136 citations screened, 26 eligible studies were retained. Most studies were assessed to have a high risk of bias, and many had methodological limitations. Descriptive summaries suggest that turmeric is safe, with possible efficacy in patients with IBD or IBS, but its effects were inconsistent for other conditions. The efficacy of turmeric in digestive disorders remains unclear due to the high risk of bias and methodological limitations of the included studies. Future studies should be designed to include larger sample sizes, use rigorous statistical methods, employ core outcome sets, and adhere to reporting guidance for RCTs of herbal interventions to facilitate more meaningful comparisons and robust conclusions.

Optimizing a mentorship program from the perspective of academic medicine leadership - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Effective mentorship is an important contributor to academic success. Given the critical role of leadership in fostering mentorship, this study sought to explore the perspectives of departmental leadership regarding 1) current departmental mentorship processes; and 2) crucial components of a mentorship program that would enhance the effectiveness of mentorship. METHODS: Department Division Directors (DDDs), Vice-Chairs, and Mentorship Facilitators from the Department of Medicine at the University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine were interviewed between April and December 2021 using a semi-structured guide. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, then coded. Analysis occurred in 2 steps: 1) codes were organized to identify emergent themes; then 2) the Social Ecological Model (SEM) was applied to interpret the findings. RESULTS: Nineteen interviews (14 DDDs, 3 Vice-Chairs, and 2 Mentorship Facilitator) were completed. Analysis revealed three themes: (1) a culture of mentorship permeated the department as evidenced by rigorous mentorship processes, divisional mentorship innovations, and faculty that were keen to mentor; (2) barriers to the establishment of effective mentoring relationships existed at 3 levels: departmental, interpersonal (mentee-mentor relationships), and mentee; and (3) strengthening the culture of mentorship could entail scaling up pre-existing mentorship processes and promoting faculty engagement. Application of SEM highlighted critical program features and determined that two components of interventions (creating tools to measure mentorship outcomes and systems for mentor recognition) were potential enablers of success. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing 'mentorship outcome measures' can incentivize and maintain relationships. By tangibly delineating departmental expectations for mentorship and creating systems that recognize mentors, these measures can contribute to a culture of mentorship.

Rapid antigen-based and rapid molecular tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: a rapid review with network meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.

BACKGROUND: The global spread of COVID-19 created an explosion in rapid tests with results in < 1 hour, but their relative performance characteristics are not fully understood yet. Our aim was to determine the most sensitive and specific rapid test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Design: Rapid review and diagnostic test accuracy network meta-analysis (DTA-NMA). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing rapid antigen and/or rapid molecular test(s) to detect SARS-CoV-2 in participants of any age, suspected or not with SARS-CoV-2 infection. INFORMATION SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, up to September 12, 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity and specificity of rapid antigen and molecular tests suitable for detecting SARS-CoV-2. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment: Screening of literature search results was conducted by one reviewer; data abstraction was completed by one reviewer and independently verified by a second reviewer. Risk of bias was not assessed in the included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random-effects meta-analysis and DTA-NMA. RESULTS: We included 93 studies (reported in 88 articles) relating to 36 rapid antigen tests in 104,961 participants and 23 rapid molecular tests in 10,449 participants. Overall, rapid antigen tests had a sensitivity of 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.70-0.79) and specificity of 0.99 (0.98-0.99). Rapid antigen test sensitivity was higher when nasal or combined samples (e.g., combinations of nose, throat, mouth, or saliva samples) were used, but lower when nasopharyngeal samples were used, and in those classified as asymptomatic at the time of testing. Rapid molecular tests may result in fewer false negatives than rapid antigen tests (sensitivity: 0.93, 0.88-0.96; specificity: 0.98, 0.97-0.99). The tests with the highest sensitivity and specificity estimates were the Xpert Xpress rapid molecular test by Cepheid (sensitivity: 0.99, 0.83-1.00; specificity: 0.97, 0.69-1.00) among the 23 commercial rapid molecular tests and the COVID-VIRO test by AAZ-LMB (sensitivity: 0.93, 0.48-0.99; specificity: 0.98, 0.44-1.00) among the 36 rapid antigen tests we examined. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid molecular tests were associated with both high sensitivity and specificity, while rapid antigen tests were mainly associated with high specificity, according to the minimum performance requirements by WHO and Health Canada. Our rapid review was limited to English, peer-reviewed published results of commercial tests, and study risk of bias was not assessed. A full systematic review is required. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021289712.

Efficacy of sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions in chronic disease management in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions.

BACKGROUND: Chronic disease management (CDM) through sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions ensures long-term, high-quality care. We assessed implementation of KT interventions for supporting CDM and their efficacy when sustained in older adults. METHODS: Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis engaging 17 knowledge users using integrated KT. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including adults (> 65 years old) with chronic disease(s), their caregivers, health and/or policy-decision makers receiving a KT intervention to carry out a CDM intervention for at least 12 months (versus other KT interventions or usual care). INFORMATION SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from each database's inception to March 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sustainability, fidelity, adherence of KT interventions for CDM practice, quality of life (QOL) and quality of care (QOC). Data extraction, risk of bias (ROB) assessment: We screened, abstracted and appraised articles (Effective Practice and Organisation of Care ROB tool) independently and in duplicate. DATA SYNTHESIS: We performed both random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses and estimated mean differences (MDs) for continuous and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data. RESULTS: We included 158 RCTs (973,074 participants [961,745 patients, 5540 caregivers, 5789 providers]) and 39 companion reports comprising 329 KT interventions, involving patients (43.2%), healthcare providers (20.7%) or both (10.9%). We identified 16 studies described as assessing sustainability in 8.1% interventions, 67 studies as assessing adherence in 35.6% interventions and 20 studies as assessing fidelity in 8.7% of the interventions. Most meta-analyses suggested that KT interventions improved QOL, but imprecisely (36 item Short-Form mental [SF-36 mental]: MD 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] [- 1.25, 3.47], 14 RCTs, 5876 participants, I2 = 96%; European QOL-5 dimensions: MD 0.01, 95% CI [- 0.01, 0.02], 15 RCTs, 6628 participants, I2 = 25%; St George's Respiratory Questionnaire: MD - 2.12, 95% CI [- 3.72, - 0.51] 44 12 RCTs, 2893 participants, I2 = 44%). KT interventions improved QOC (OR 1.55, 95% CI [1.29, 1.85], 12 RCTS, 5271 participants, I2 = 21%). CONCLUSIONS: KT intervention sustainability was infrequently defined and assessed. Sustained KT interventions have the potential to improve QOL and QOC in older adults with CDM. However, their overall efficacy remains uncertain and it varies by effect modifiers, including intervention type, chronic disease number, comorbidities, and participant age. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018084810.

Developing the intersectionality supplemented Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and tools for intersectionality considerations.

BACKGROUND: The concept of intersectionality proposes that demographic and social constructs intersect with larger social structures of oppression and privilege to shape experiences. While intersectionality is a widely accepted concept in feminist and gender studies, there has been little attempt to use this lens in implementation science. We aimed to supplement the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a commonly used framework in implementation science, to support the incorporation of intersectionality in implementation science projects by (1) integrating an intersectional lens to the CFIR; and (2) developing a tool for researchers to be used alongside the updated framework. METHODS: Using a nominal group technique, an interdisciplinary framework committee (n = 17) prioritized the CFIR as one of three implementation science models, theories, and frameworks to supplement with intersectionality considerations; the modification of the other two frameworks are described in other papers. The CFIR subgroup (n = 7) reviewed the five domains and 26 constructs in the CFIR and prioritized domains and constructs for supplementation with intersectional considerations. The subgroup then iteratively developed recommendations and prompts for incorporating an intersectional approach within the prioritized domains and constructs. We developed recommendations and prompts to help researchers consider how personal identities and power structures may affect the facilitators and inhibitors of behavior change and the implementation of subsequent interventions. RESULTS: We achieved consensus on how to apply an intersectional lens to CFIR after six rounds of meetings. The final intersectionality supplemented CFIR includes the five original domains, and 28 constructs; the outer systems and structures and the outer cultures constructs were added to the outer setting domain. Intersectionality prompts were added to 13 of the 28 constructs. CONCLUSION: Through an expert-consensus approach, we modified the CFIR to include intersectionality considerations and developed a tool with prompts to help implementation users apply an intersectional lens using the updated framework.

Are older adults considered in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease mobile health research? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The use of mobile health (mHealth) for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is rapidly growing and may help address the complex respiratory care needs of our ageing population. However, little is currently known about how airways mHealth is developed and used among older adults (≥65 years). OBJECTIVE: To identify if and how older adults with asthma and COPD have been incorporated across the mHealth research cycle. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials for studies pertaining to the development or evaluation of asthma and COPD mHealth for adults published after 2010. Study, participant and mHealth details, including any considerations of older age, were extracted, synthesised and charted. RESULTS: A total of 334 studies of 191 mHealth tools were identified. Adults ≥65 years old were included in 33.3% of asthma mHealth studies and 85.3% of COPD studies. Discussions of older age focused on barriers to technology use. Methodologic and/or analytic considerations of older age were mostly absent throughout the research cycle. Among the 28 instances quantitative age-related analyses were detailed, 12 described positive mHealth use and satisfaction outcomes in older adults versus negative or equivocal outcomes. CONCLUSION: We identified an overall lack of consideration for older age throughout the airways mHealth research cycle, even among COPD mHealth studies that predominantly included older adults. We also found a contrast between the perceptions of how older age might negatively influence mHealth use and available quantitative evaluations. Future airways mHealth research must better integrate the needs and concerns of older adults.

Quality improvement strategies for diabetes care: Effects on outcomes for adults living with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: There is a large body of evidence evaluating quality improvement (QI) programmes to improve care for adults living with diabetes. These programmes are often comprised of multiple QI strategies, which may be implemented in various combinations. Decision-makers planning to implement or evaluate a new QI programme, or both, need reliable evidence on the relative effectiveness of different QI strategies (individually and in combination) for different patient populations. OBJECTIVES: To update existing systematic reviews of diabetes QI programmes and apply novel meta-analytical techniques to estimate the effectiveness of QI strategies (individually and in combination) on diabetes quality of care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL) and trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) to 4 June 2019. We conducted a top-up search to 23 September 2021; we screened these search results and 42 studies meeting our eligibility criteria are available in the awaiting classification section. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials that assessed a QI programme to improve care in outpatient settings for people living with diabetes. QI programmes needed to evaluate at least one system- or provider-targeted QI strategy alone or in combination with a patient-targeted strategy. - System-targeted: case management (CM); team changes (TC); electronic patient registry (EPR); facilitated relay of clinical information (FR); continuous quality improvement (CQI). - Provider-targeted: audit and feedback (AF); clinician education (CE); clinician reminders (CR); financial incentives (FI). - Patient-targeted: patient education (PE); promotion of self-management (PSM); patient reminders (PR). Patient-targeted QI strategies needed to occur with a minimum of one provider or system-targeted strategy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We dual-screened search results and abstracted data on study design, study population and QI strategies. We assessed the impact of the programmes on 13 measures of diabetes care, including: glycaemic control (e.g. mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)); cardiovascular risk factor management (e.g. mean systolic blood pressure (SBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), proportion of people living with diabetes that quit smoking or receiving cardiovascular medications); and screening/prevention of microvascular complications (e.g. proportion of patients receiving retinopathy or foot screening); and harms (e.g. proportion of patients experiencing adverse hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia). We modelled the association of each QI strategy with outcomes using a series of hierarchical multivariable meta-regression models in a Bayesian framework. The previous version of this review identified that different strategies were more or less effective depending on baseline levels of outcomes. To explore this further, we extended the main additive model for continuous outcomes (HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C) to include an interaction term between each strategy and average baseline risk for each study (baseline thresholds were based on a data-driven approach; we used the median of all baseline values reported in the trials). Based on model diagnostics, the baseline interaction models for HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C performed better than the main model and are therefore presented as the primary analyses for these outcomes. Based on the model results, we qualitatively ordered each QI strategy within three tiers (Top, Middle, Bottom) based on its magnitude of effect relative to the other QI strategies, where 'Top' indicates that the QI strategy was likely one of the most effective strategies for that specific outcome. Secondary analyses explored the sensitivity of results to choices in model specification and priors.  Additional information about the methods and results of the review are available as Appendices in an online repository. This review will be maintained as a living systematic review; we will update our syntheses as more data become available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 553 trials (428 patient-randomised and 125 cluster-randomised trials), including a total of 412,161 participants. Of the included studies, 66% involved people living with type 2 diabetes only. Participants were 50% female and the median age of participants was 58.4 years. The mean duration of follow-up was 12.5 months. HbA1c was the commonest reported outcome; screening outcomes and outcomes related to cardiovascular medications, smoking and harms were reported infrequently. The most frequently evaluated QI strategies across all study arms were PE, PSM and CM, while the least frequently evaluated QI strategies included AF, FI and CQI. Our confidence in the evidence is limited due to a lack of information on how studies were conducted.  Four QI strategies (CM, TC, PE, PSM) were consistently identified as 'Top' across the majority of outcomes. All QI strategies were ranked as 'Top' for at least one key outcome. The majority of effects of individual QI strategies were modest, but when used in combination could result in meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. The median number of QI strategies in multicomponent QI programmes was three.  Combinations of the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to the below effects:  - PR + PSM + CE: decrease in HbA1c by 0.41% (credibility interval (CrI) -0.61 to -0.22) when baseline HbA1c < 8.3%; - CM + PE + EPR: decrease in HbA1c by 0.62% (CrI -0.84 to -0.39) when baseline HbA1c > 8.3%;  - PE + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 2.14 mmHg (CrI -3.80 to -0.52) when baseline SBP < 136 mmHg; - CM + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 4.39 mmHg (CrI -6.20 to -2.56) when baseline SBP > 136 mmHg;  - TC + PE + CM: LDL-C lowering of 5.73 mg/dL (CrI -7.93 to -3.61) when baseline LDL < 107 mg/dL; - TC + CM + CR: LDL-C lowering by 5.52 mg/dL (CrI -9.24 to -1.89) when baseline LDL > 107 mg/dL. Assuming a baseline screening rate of 50%, the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to an absolute improvement of 33% in retinopathy screening (PE + PR + TC) and 38% absolute increase in foot screening (PE + TC + Other). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant body of evidence about QI programmes to improve the management of diabetes. Multicomponent QI programmes for diabetes care (comprised of effective QI strategies) may achieve meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. For health system decision-makers, the evidence summarised in this review can be used to identify strategies to include in QI programmes. For researchers, this synthesis identifies higher-priority QI strategies to examine in further research regarding how to optimise their evaluation and effects. We will maintain this as a living systematic review.

Canadian public perceptions and experiences with information during the COVID-19 pandemic: strategies to optimize future risk communications.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the spread of misinformation worldwide. The purpose of this study was to explore perceptions of misinformation and preferred sources of obtaining COVID-19 information from those living in Canada. In particular, we sought to explore the perceptions of East Asian individuals in Canada, who experienced stigma related to COVID-19 messaging. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative thematic analysis study. Interviews were offered in English, Mandarin and Cantonese. Interviewers probed for domains related to knowledge about COVID-19, preferred sources of information, perceived barriers and facilitators of misinformation, and preferences for communication during a health emergency. Interviews were recorded, translated, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a framework approach. Transcripts were independently double-coded until > 60% agreement was reached. This study received research ethics approval. RESULTS: Fifty-five interviews were conducted. The majority of participants were women (67%); median age was 52 years. 55% of participants were of East-Asian descent. Participants obtained information about COVID-19 from diverse English and non-English sources including news media, government agencies or representatives, social media, and personal networks. Challenges to seeking and understanding information included: encountering misinformation, making sense of evolving or conflicting public health guidance, and limited information on topics of interest. 65% of participants reported encountering COVID-19  misinformation. East Asian participants called on government officials to champion messaging to reduce stigmatizing and racist rhetoric and highlighted the importance of having accessible, non-English language information sources. Participants provided recommendations for future public health communications guidance during health emergencies, including preferences for message content, information messengers, dissemination platforms and format of messages. Almost all participants preferred receiving information from the Canadian government and found it helpful to utilize various mediums and platforms such as social media and news media for future risk communication, urging for consistency across all platforms. CONCLUSIONS: We provide insights on Canadian experiences navigating COVID-19 information, where more than half perceived encountering misinformation on platforms when seeking COVID-19 information . We provide recommendations to inform public health communications during future health emergencies.

Outcomes of critically ill older adults with COVID-19: a multicentre retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Older adults with COVID-19 have a high prevalence of complications and mortality during hospitalization. Given the large proportion of older adults requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), we aimed to describe the management and outcomes of older adults with COVID-19 requiring ICU care and identify predictors of hospital mortality. METHODS: We included consecutive patients ≥ 65 yr of age who were admitted between 11 March 2020 and 30 June 2021 to one of five Toronto (ON, Canada) ICUs with a primary diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a retrospective cohort study. Patient characteristics, ICU treatment, and outcomes were recorded. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of the 273 patients, the median [interquartile range] age was 74 [69-80] yr, 104 (38.1%) were female, and 164 (60.1%) required invasive mechanical ventilation. One hundred and forty-two patients (52.0%) survived their hospital stay. Compared with survivors, nonsurvivors were older (74 [70-82] yr vs 73 [68-78] yr; P = 0.03), and a smaller proportion was female (39/131, 29.8% vs 65/142, 45.8%; P = 0.01). Patients had long hospital (19 [11-35] days) and ICU (9 [5-22] days) stays, with no significant differences in ICU length of stay or duration of invasive mechanical ventilation between the two groups. Higher APACHE II score, increasing age, and the need for organ support were independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality while female sex was associated with lower mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Older critically ill COVID-19 patients had long ICU and hospital stays, and approximately half died in hospital. Further research is needed to identify individuals who will benefit most from an ICU admission and to evaluate posthospitalization outcomes.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les personnes âgées atteintes de la COVID-19 ont une prévalence élevée de complications et de mortalité pendant l'hospitalisation. Compte tenu de la forte proportion de personnes âgées nécessitant une admission dans une unité de soins intensifs (USI), nous avons cherché à décrire la prise en charge et les devenirs des personnes âgées atteintes de COVID-19 nécessitant des soins intensifs et à identifier les prédicteurs de mortalité hospitalière. MéTHODE: Nous avons inclus des patient·es consécutif·ves âgé·es de ≥ 65 ans admis·es entre le 11 mars 2020 et le 30 juin 2021 dans l'une des cinq unités de soins intensifs de Toronto (ON, Canada) avec un diagnostic primaire d'infection par le SRAS-CoV-2 dans une étude de cohorte rétrospective. Les caractéristiques des patient·es, le traitement en USI et les devenirs ont été enregistrés. Nous avons utilisé une régression logistique multivariable pour identifier les prédicteurs de mortalité hospitalière. RéSULTATS: Parmi les 273 patient·es, l'âge médian [écart interquartile] était de 74 [69-80] ans, 104 (38,1 %) étaient des femmes et 164 (60,1 %) ont nécessité une ventilation mécanique invasive. Cent quarante-deux personnes (52,0 %) ont survécu à leur séjour à l'hôpital. Comparativement aux personnes survivantes, les personnes qui n'ont pas survécu étaient plus âgées (74 [70-82] ans vs 73 [68­78] ans; P = 0,03), et une plus faible proportion était de sexe féminin (39/131, 29,8 % vs 65/142, 45,8 %; P = 0,01). Les séjours des patient·es à l'hôpital (19 [11-35] jours) et à l'USI (9 [5-22] jours) étaient longs, sans différence significative dans la durée du séjour en USI ou la durée de la ventilation mécanique invasive entre les deux groupes. Un score APACHE II plus élevé, un âge plus avancé et le besoin de mesures de soutien d'organes étaient indépendamment associés à une mortalité plus élevée à l'hôpital, tandis que le sexe féminin était associé à une mortalité plus faible. CONCLUSION : Les personnes plus âgées gravement malades atteintes de la COVID-19 ont eu de longs séjours en soins intensifs et à l'hôpital, et environ la moitié sont décédées à l'hôpital. D'autres recherches sont nécessaires pour identifier les personnes qui bénéficieraient le plus d'une admission à l'USI et pour évaluer les devenirs post-hospitalisation.

Using implementation science to promote the use of the fascia iliaca blocks in hip fracture care.

PURPOSE: There is variable and suboptimal use of fascia iliaca compartment nerve blocks (FICBs) in hip fracture care. Our objective was to use an evidence-based and theory-informed implementation science approach to analyze barriers and facilitators to timely administration of FICB and select evidence-based interventions to enhance uptake. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study at a single centre using semistructured interviews and site observations. We interviewed 35 stakeholders including health care providers, managers, patients, and caregivers. We mapped barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We compared the rate and timeliness of FICB administration before and after evidence-based implementation strategies were applied. RESULTS: The study identified 18 barriers and 11 facilitators within seven themes of influences of FICB use: interpersonal relationships between health care professionals; clinician knowledge and skills related to FICB; roles, responsibilities, and processes for delivering FICB; perceptions on using FICB for pain; patient and caregiver perceptions on using FICB for pain; communication of hip fracture care between departments; and resources for delivering FICBs. We mapped the behaviour change domains to eight implementation strategies: restructure the environment, create and distribute educational materials, prepare patients to be active participants, perform audits and give feedback, use local opinion leaders, use champions, train staff on FICB procedures, and mandate change. We observed an increase in the rates of FICBs administered (48% vs 65%) and a decrease in the median time to administration (1.63 vs 0.81 days). CONCLUSION: Our study explains why FICBs are underused and shows that the TDF and CFIR provide a framework to identify barriers and facilitators to FICB implementation. The mapped implementation strategies can guide institutions to improve use of FICB in hip fracture care.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Il existe une utilisation variable et sous-optimale des blocs nerveux du compartiment fascia iliaca (FICB) dans les soins des fractures de la hanche. Notre objectif était d'utiliser une approche scientifique de la mise en œuvre fondée sur des données probantes et sur la théorie pour analyser les obstacles et les facilitateurs à l'administration opportune d'un FICB et pour sélectionner des interventions fondées sur des données probantes pour améliorer l'adoption de cette technique. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude qualitative dans un seul centre à l'aide d'entrevues semi-structurées et d'observations sur place. Nous avons interviewé 35 intervenant·es, y compris des prestataires de soins de santé, des gestionnaires, des patient·es et des soignant·es. Nous avons cartographié les obstacles et les facilitateurs du cadre des domaines théoriques (Theoretical Domains Framework, TDF) et du cadre consolidé pour la recherche sur la mise en œuvre (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, CFIR). Nous avons comparé le taux et la rapidité d'administration d'un FICB avant et après l'application des stratégies de mise en œuvre fondées sur des données probantes. RéSULTATS: L'étude a identifié 18 obstacles et 11 facilitateurs dans sept thèmes d'influence de l'utilisation du FICB : les relations interpersonnelles entre les professionnel·les de la santé; les connaissances et les compétences des clinicien·nes liées au FICB; les rôles, responsabilités et processus d'exécution des FICB; les perceptions de l'utilisation des FICB pour soulager la douleur; les perceptions des patient·es et des soignant·es concernant l'utilisation de FICB pour soulager la douleur; la communication des soins des fractures de la hanche entre les services; et les ressources nécessaires à l'exécution des FICB. Nous avons mis en correspondance les domaines de changement de comportement avec huit stratégies de mise en œuvre : restructurer l'environnement, créer et distribuer du matériel éducatif, préparer les patient·es à participer activement, effectuer des audits et donner de la rétroaction, faire appel à des leaders d'opinion locales et locaux, utiliser des champion·nes, former le personnel sur les interventions de FICB et forcer au changement. Nous avons observé une augmentation des taux de FICB administrés (48% vs 65%) et une diminution du délai médian d'administration (1,63 vs 0,81 jour). CONCLUSION: Notre étude explique pourquoi les FICB sont sous-utilisés et montre que le TDF et le CFIR fournissent un cadre pour identifier les obstacles et les facilitateurs à la mise en œuvre des FICB. Les stratégies de mise en œuvre cartographiées peuvent aider les établissements à améliorer l'utilisation des FICB dans le traitement des fractures de la hanche.

Exploring the Perspectives and Experiences of Older Adults With Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Toward Mobile Health: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of mobile health (mHealth) in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is growing, and as the population ages, a greater number of older adults stand to benefit from mHealth-enhanced airway disease care. Though older adults are a heterogeneous population of health technology users, older age represents a potential barrier to health technology adoption, and there is currently a lack of knowledge on how older age influences mHealth use in asthma and COPD. OBJECTIVE: In this qualitative study, we sought to explore the experiences and perspectives of adults who were aged 65 years and older with asthma and COPD toward mHealth use. METHODS: Semistructured individual interviews were conducted with adults who were aged 65 years and older with asthma or COPD and owned a smartphone. Applying phenomenological methodology, we analyzed interview transcripts in order to develop themes and propose an essential experience of mHealth use among older adults with airway disease. We then summarized our qualitative findings and proposed strategies to leverage our results in order to guide future research and implementation efforts targeting older adults' use of airway mHealth. RESULTS: Twenty participants (mean age 79.8, SD 4.4 years) were interviewed. Participants described a central tension between (1) the perception that mHealth could help maintain independence throughout aging and (2) an apprehension toward the ways in which mHealth could negatively affect established health care experiences. Several elements of these 2 themes are absent from previous research focusing on younger adults with asthma and COPD. The individual elements of these 2 themes informed potential strategies to optimize future older adults' use of asthma and COPD mHealth tools. CONCLUSIONS: Focusing on the perspectives and experiences of older adults with asthma and COPD in their use of mHealth identified novel understandings of health technology use in this important demographic in need of greater care. These lessons were translated into potential strategies that will need to be objectively evaluated in future airway mHealth research, development, and implementation efforts.

Embedding rapid reviews in health policy and systems decision-making: Impacts and lessons learned from four low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Demand for rapid evidence-based syntheses to inform health policy and systems decision-making has increased worldwide, including in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To promote use of rapid syntheses in LMICs, the WHO's Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research (AHPSR) created the Embedding Rapid Reviews in Health Systems Decision-Making (ERA) Initiative. Following a call for proposals, four LMICs were selected (Georgia, India, Malaysia and Zimbabwe) and supported for 1 year to embed rapid response platforms within a public institution with a health policy or systems decision-making mandate. METHODS: While the selected platforms had experience in health policy and systems research and evidence syntheses, platforms were less confident conducting rapid evidence syntheses. A technical assistance centre (TAC) was created from the outset to develop and lead a capacity-strengthening program for rapid syntheses, tailored to the platforms based on their original proposals and needs as assessed in a baseline questionnaire. The program included training in rapid synthesis methods, as well as generating synthesis demand, engaging knowledge users and ensuring knowledge uptake. Modalities included live training webinars, in-country workshops and support through phone, email and an online platform. LMICs provided regular updates on policy-makers' requests and the rapid products provided, as well as barriers, facilitators and impacts. Post-initiative, platforms were surveyed. RESULTS: Platforms provided rapid syntheses across a range of AHPSR themes, and successfully engaged national- and state-level policy-makers. Examples of substantial policy impact were observed, including for COVID-19. Although the post-initiative survey response rate was low, three quarters of those responding felt confident in their ability to conduct a rapid evidence synthesis. Lessons learned coalesced around three themes - the importance of context-specific expertise in conducting reviews, facilitating cross-platform learning, and planning for platform sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: The ERA initiative successfully established rapid response platforms in four LMICs. The short timeframe limited the number of rapid products produced, but there were examples of substantial impact and growing demand. We emphasize that LMICs can and should be involved not only in identifying and articulating needs but as co-designers in their own capacity-strengthening programs. More time is required to assess whether these platforms will be sustained for the long-term.

Controlled-release hydromorphone and risk of infection in adults: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence suggests that people who inject drugs (PWID) may be at an increased risk of developing infective endocarditis (IE), hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and/or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection from hydromorphone controlled-release formulation. The hypothesized mechanism is related to insolubility of the drug, which promotes reuse, leading to contamination of injecting equipment. However, this relationship has not been confirmed. We aimed to conduct a systematic review including adult PWID exposed to controlled-release hydromorphone and the risk of acquiring IE, HCV, and HIV. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Evidence Based Medicine reviews from inception until September 2021. Following pilot testing, two reviewers conducted all screening of citations and full-text articles, as well as abstracted data, and appraised risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Effective Practice and Organization of Care tool. Equity issues were examined using the PROGRESS-PLUS framework. Discrepancies were resolved consistently by a third reviewer. Meta-analysis was not feasible due to heterogeneity across the studies. RESULTS: After screening 3,231 citations from electronic databases, 722 citations from unpublished sources/reference scanning, and 626 full-text articles, five studies were included. Five were cohort studies, and one was a case-control study. The risk of bias varied across the studies. Two studies reported on gender, as well as other PROGRESS-PLUS criteria (race, housing, and employment). Three studies focused specifically on the controlled-release formulation of hydromorphone, whereas two studies focused on all formulations of hydromorphone. One retrospective cohort study found an association between controlled-release hydromorphone and IE, whereas a case-control study found no evidence of an association. One retrospective cohort study found an association between the number of hydromorphone controlled-release prescriptions and prevalence of HCV. None of the studies specifically reported on associations with HIV. DISCUSSION: Very few studies have examined the risk of IE, HCV, and HIV infection after exposure to controlled-release hydromorphone. Very low-quality and scant evidence suggests uncertainty around the risks of blood-borne infections, such as HCV and IE to PWID using this medication.

Systematic Review on the Cost-Effectiveness of Seasonal Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults.

OBJECTIVES: Older adults are at high risk of influenza-related complications or hospitalization. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of all influenza vaccine options for older adults. METHODS: This systematic review identified economic evaluation studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccines in adults ≥65 years of age from 5 literature databases. Two reviewers independently selected, extracted, and appraised relevant studies using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Economic Evaluations and Heyland's generalizability checklist. Costs were converted to 2019 Canadian dollars and adjusted for inflation and purchasing power parity. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies were included. There were 18 comparisons of quadrivalent inactivated vaccine (QIV) versus trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV): 5 showed QIV dominated TIV (ie, lower costs and higher health benefit), and 13 showed the results depended on willingness to pay (WTP). There were 9 comparisons of high-dose TIV (TIV-HD) versus TIV: 5 showed TIV-HD dominated TIV, and 4 showed the results depended on WTP. There were 8 comparisons of adjuvanted TIV (TIV-ADJ) versus TIV: 4 showed TIV-ADJ dominated TIV, and 4 showed the results depended on WTP. There were few pairwise comparisons among QIV, TIV-HD, and TIV-ADJ. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests QIV, TIV-HD, and TIV-ADJ are cost-effective against TIV for a WTP threshold of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Future studies should include new and existing vaccine options for broad age ranges and use more robust methodologies-such as real-world evaluations or modeling studies accounting for methodological, structural, and parameter uncertainty.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Intermediate-Acting, Long-Acting, Ultralong-Acting, and Biosimilar Insulins for Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: The incidence of type 1 diabetes mellitus is increasing every year requiring substantial expenditure on treatment and complications. A systematic review was conducted on the cost-effectiveness of insulin formulations, including ultralong-, long-, or intermediate-acting insulin, and their biosimilar insulin equivalents. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, HTA, and NHS EED were searched from inception to June 11, 2021. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were included if insulin formulations in adults (≥ 16 years) with type 1 diabetes mellitus were evaluated. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles, extracted study data, and appraised their quality using the Drummond 10-item checklist. Costs were converted to 2020 US dollars adjusting for inflation and purchasing power parity across currencies. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies were included. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged widely across the studies. All pairwise comparisons (11 of 11, 100%) found that ultralong-acting insulin was cost-effective compared with other long-acting insulins, including a long-acting biosimilar. Most pairwise comparisons (24 of 27, 89%) concluded that long-acting insulin was cost-effective compared with intermediate-acting insulin. Few studies compared long-acting insulins with one another. CONCLUSIONS: Long-acting insulin may be cost-effective compared with intermediate-acting insulin. Future studies should directly compare biosimilar options and long-acting insulin options and evaluate the long-term consequences of ultralong-acting insulins.