RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Arthritis, regardless of cause, has significant physical, social and psychological impacts on patients. We aimed to identify the non-healthcare needs perceived by patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) and osteoarthritis (OA), and to determine if these differ. METHODS: We electronically searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE and CINAHL (1990-2020) systematically to identify non-healthcare-related needs of people with IA or OA. All citations were screened and quality appraised by two reviewers. Data was extracted by a single reviewer. RESULTS: The search identified 7853 citations, with 31 studies included (12 for OA, 20 for IA). Six areas of need emerged and these were similar in both group These were: 1) Assistance with activities of daily living especially related to a lack of independence; 2) Social connectedness: need for social participation; 3) Financial security: worry about financial security and increased costs of health-seeking behaviours; 4) Occupational needs: desire to continue work for financial and social reasons, facilitated by flexibility of workplace conditions/environment; 5) Exercise and leisure: including limitation due to pain; 6) Transportation: limitations in ability to drive and take public transport due to mobility concerns. Many areas of need were linked; e.g. loss of employment and requiring support from family was associated with a sense of "failure" and loss of identity, as social isolation. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the pervasive impact of arthritis on peoples' lives, regardless of aetiology, albeit with a limited evidence base. Improved identification and targeting of non-healthcare needs of people with arthritis is likely to improve person-centred care.
Assuntos
Atividades Cotidianas , Osteoartrite , Atenção à Saúde , Emprego , Humanos , Osteoartrite/diagnóstico , Osteoartrite/epidemiologia , Osteoartrite/terapia , Local de TrabalhoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) offer a convenient long-term intravenous access option. Different methods exist for insertion including the use of continuous fluoroscopy for guidance, or bedside insertion techniques. The blind pushing technique is a bedside approach which involves advancing a PICC through the access sheath without imaging guidance, before taking a mobile chest radiograph to confirm tip position. Obtaining optimal position is a critical aim of PICC placement as malpositioned lines have been associated with higher complications including death. We aimed to assess the accuracy of PICC placement by comparing the tip position and complications for lines placed under fluoroscopic guidance to those placed without fluoroscopic guidance. METHODS: The Radiology Information System was used to identify 100 continuous PICC insertions in each group (fluoroscopic and blind pushing) between 1 January and 12 May 2019. Patients were excluded if there was a known history of central venous occlusion/stenosis. RESULTS: In the fluoroscopic-guided group, 0% of the lines were malpositioned compared with 60% of the lines placed using the blind pushing technique, P < 0.001. Fluoroscopic-guided PICC insertions were in place for a total of 2446 days and demonstrated 6 complications (2.45 complications per 1000 catheter days). This compared with blind pushing technique PICC insertions which were in place for a total of 1521 days and demonstrated 18 complications (11.83 complications per 1000 catheter days), P = 0.004. CONCLUSION: The use of fluoroscopy for PICC placement leads to significant improvements in tip accuracy than for PICCs placed using the blind pushing technique. While the use of these imaging resources incurs cost and time, these factors should be balanced in order to offer patients the safest and most accurate method of line insertion.