Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
Health Expect ; 27(3): e14093, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38783782

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Many Covid-19 survivors are living with unresolved, relapsing and remitting symptoms and no 'one size' of treatment is likely to be effective for everyone. Supported self-management for the varied symptoms of Long Covid (LC) is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom. We aimed to develop a new personalised support intervention for people living with LC using a structured co-design framework to guide replication and evaluation. METHODS: We used the improvement methodology, Experience-Based Co-Design, in an accelerated form to harness the collective experiences of people with LC. Incorporating evidence from 'Bridges Self-Management' (Bridges) an approach in which healthcare professionals (HCPs)are trained to support knowledge, confidence and skills of individuals living with long term conditions. Co-designed resources are also central to Bridges. Adults who self-identified as living with or recovered from LC, from England or Wales, aged 18 years and over were recruited, and HCPs, with experience of supporting people with LC. Participants took part in a series of small co-design group meetings and larger mixed meetings to agree priorities, core principles and generate resources and intervention content. RESULTS: People with LC (n = 28), and HCPs (n = 9) supported co-design of a book (hard-copy and digital form) to be used in 1:1 support sessions with a trained HCP. Co-design stages prioritised stories about physical symptoms first, and psychological and social challenges which followed, nonlinear journeys and reconceptualising stability as progress, rich descriptions of strategies and links to reputable advice and support for navigating healthcare services. Co-design enabled formulation of eight core intervention principles which underpinned the training and language used by HCPs and fidelity assessments. CONCLUSION: We have developed a new personalised support intervention, with core principles to be used in one-to-one sessions delivered by trained HCPs, with a new co-designed book as a prompt to build personalised strategies and plans using narratives, ideas, and solutions from other people with LC. Effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the 'LISTEN' intervention will be evaluated in a randomised controlled trial set within the context of the updated Framework for Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The LISTEN Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) group comprised seven people living with LC. They all contributed to the design of this study and five members were part of a larger co-design community described in this paper. They have contributed to this paper by interpreting stages of intervention design and analysis of results. Three members of our PPI group are co-authors of this paper.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Autogestão , Humanos , COVID-19/terapia , Autogestão/métodos , Feminino , Masculino , SARS-CoV-2 , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto , Reino Unido , Sobreviventes/psicologia , Idoso
2.
BMC Public Health ; 24(1): 789, 2024 Mar 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38481230

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Around one in ten people who contract Covid-19 report ongoing symptoms or 'Long Covid'. Without any known interventions to cure the condition, forms of self-management are routinely prescribed by healthcare professionals and described by people with the condition. However, there is limited research exploring what strategies are used to navigate everyday life with Long Covid, and experiences that initiate development of these strategies. Our study aimed to explore the range and influence of self-generated strategies used by people with Long Covid to navigate everyday life within the context of their own condition. METHODS: Forming part of the Long Covid Personalised Self-managemenT support co-design and EvaluatioN (LISTEN) project, we conducted a qualitative study using narrative interviews with adults who were not hospitalised with Covid-19. Participants aged over 18 years, who self-identified with Long Covid, were recruited from England and Wales. Data were analysed with patient contributors using a reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Eighteen participants (mean age = 44 years, SD = 13 years) took part in interviews held between December 2021 and February 2022. Themes were constructed which depicted 1) the landscape behind the Long Covid experience and 2) the everyday experience of participants' Long Covid. The everyday experience comprised a combination of physical, emotional, and social factors, forming three sub-themes: centrality of physical symptoms, navigating 'experts' and the 'true colour' of personal communities, and a rollercoaster of psychological ambiguity). The third theme, personal strategies to manage everyday life was constructed from participants' unique presentations and self-generated solutions to manage everyday life. This comprised five sub-themes: seeking reassurance and knowledge, developing greater self-awareness through monitoring, trial and error of 'safe' ideas, building in pleasure and comfort, and prioritising 'me'. CONCLUSIONS: Among this sample of adults with Long Covid, their experiences highlighted the unpredictable nature of the condition but also the use of creative and wide ranging self-generated strategies. The results offer people with Long Covid, and healthcare professionals supporting them, an overview of the collective evidence relating to individuals' self-management which can enable ways to live 'better' and regain some sense of identity whilst facing the impact of a debilitating, episodic condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: LISTEN ISRCTN36407216.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Autogestão , Adulto , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Síndrome de COVID-19 Pós-Aguda , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Cuidados Paliativos
3.
J Med Internet Res ; 26: e51418, 2024 Jun 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38838330

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Social media use has potential to facilitate the rapid dissemination of research evidence to busy health and social care practitioners. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to quantitatively synthesize evidence of the between- and within-group effectiveness of social media for dissemination of research evidence to health and social care practitioners. It also compared effectiveness between different social media platforms, formats, and strategies. METHODS: We searched electronic databases for articles in English that were published between January 1, 2010, and January 10, 2023, and that evaluated social media interventions for disseminating research evidence to qualified, postregistration health and social care practitioners in measures of reach, engagement, direct dissemination, or impact. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments were carried out by at least 2 independent reviewers. Meta-analyses of standardized pooled effects were carried out for between- and within-group effectiveness of social media and comparisons between platforms, formats, and strategies. Certainty of evidence for outcomes was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) framework. RESULTS: In total, 50 mixed-quality articles that were heterogeneous in design and outcome were included (n=9, 18% were randomized controlled trials [RCTs]). Reach (measured in number of practitioners, impressions, or post views) was reported in 26 studies. Engagement (measured in likes or post interactions) was evaluated in 21 studies. Direct dissemination (measured in link clicks, article views, downloads, or altmetric attention score) was analyzed in 23 studies (8 RCTs). Impact (measured in citations or measures of thinking and practice) was reported in 13 studies. Included studies almost universally indicated effects in favor of social media interventions, although effect sizes varied. Cumulative evidence indicated moderate certainty of large and moderate between-group effects of social media interventions on direct dissemination (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.88; P=.02) and impact (SMD 0.76; P<.001). After social media interventions, cumulative evidence showed moderate certainty of large within-group effects on reach (SMD 1.99; P<.001), engagement (SMD 3.74; P<.001), and direct dissemination (SMD 0.82; P=.004) and low certainty of a small within-group effect on impacting thinking or practice (SMD 0.45; P=.02). There was also evidence for the effectiveness of using multiple social media platforms (including Twitter, subsequently rebranded X; and Facebook), images (particularly infographics), and intensive social media strategies with frequent, daily posts and involving influential others. No included studies tested the dissemination of research evidence to social care practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: Social media was effective for disseminating research evidence to health care practitioners. More intense social media campaigns using specific platforms, formats, and strategies may be more effective than less intense interventions. Implications include recommendations for effective dissemination of research evidence to health care practitioners and further RCTs in this field, particularly investigating the dissemination of social care research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022378793; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=378793. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/45684.


Assuntos
Disseminação de Informação , Mídias Sociais , Humanos , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Disseminação de Informação/métodos
4.
Cardiol Young ; 34(3): 667-675, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37727882

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Children and young people with CHD benefit from regular physical activity. Parents are reported as facilitators and barriers to their children's physical activity. The aim of this study was to explore parental factors, child factors, and their clinical experience on physical activity participation in young people with CHD. METHODS: An online questionnaire was co-developed with parents (n = 3) who have children with CHD. The survey was then distributed in the United Kingdom by social media and CHD networks, between October 2021 and February 2022. Data were analysed using mixed methods. RESULTS: Eighty-three parents/guardians responded (94% mothers). Young people with CHD were 7.3 ± 5.0 years old (range 0-20 years; 53% female) and 84% performed activity. Parental participation in activity (X2(1) = 6.9, P < 0.05) and perceiving activity as important for their child were positively associated with activity (Fisher's Exact, P < 0.05). Some parents (∼15%) were unsure of the safety of activity, and most (∼70%) were unsure where to access further information about activity. Fifty-two parents (72%) had never received activity advice in clinic, and of the 20 who received advice, 10 said it was inconsistent. Qualitative analysis produced the theme "Knowledge is power and comfort." Parents described not knowing what activity was appropriate or the impact of it on their child. CONCLUSION: Parental participation and attitudes towards activity potentially influence their child's activity. A large proportion of young people performed activity despite a lack and inconsistency of activity advice offered by CHD clinics. Young people with CHD would benefit from activity advice with their families in clinics.


Assuntos
Mães , Pais , Criança , Humanos , Feminino , Adolescente , Pré-Escolar , Masculino , Exercício Físico , Coração , Reino Unido
5.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 12: e45684, 2023 May 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37171840

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Effective dissemination of research to health and social care practitioners enhances clinical practice and evidence-based care. Social media use has potential to facilitate dissemination to busy practitioners. OBJECTIVE: This is a protocol for a systematic review that will quantitatively synthesize evidence of the effectiveness of social media, compared with no social media, for dissemination of research evidence to health and social care practitioners. Social media platforms, formats, and sharing mechanisms used for effective dissemination of research evidence will also be identified and compared. METHODS: Electronic database searches (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ERIC, LISTA, and OpenGrey) will be conducted from January 1, 2010, to January 10, 2023, for studies published in English. Randomized, nonrandomized, pre-post study designs or case studies evaluating the effect of social media on dissemination of research evidence to postregistration health and social care practitioners will be included. Studies that do not involve social media or dissemination or those that evaluate dissemination of nonresearch information (eg, multisource educational materials) to students or members of the public only, or without quantitative data on outcomes of interest, will be excluded. Screening will be carried out by 2 independent reviewers. Data extraction and quality assessment, using either the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias or the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, will be completed by 2 independent reviewers. Outcomes of interest will be reported in 4 domains (reach, engagement, dissemination, and impact). Data synthesis will include quantitative comparisons using narrative text, tables, and figures. A meta-analysis of standardized pooled effects will be undertaken, and subgroup analyses will be applied, if appropriate. RESULTS: Searches and screening will be completed by the end of May 2023. Data extraction and analyses will be completed by the end of July 2023, after which findings will be synthesized and reported by the end of October 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review will summarize the evidence for the effectiveness of social media for the dissemination of research evidence to health and social care practitioners. The limitations of the evidence may include multiple outcomes or methodological heterogeneity that limit meta-analyses, potential risk of bias in included studies, and potential publication bias. The limitations of the study design may include potential insensitivity of the electronic database search strategy. The findings from this review will inform the dissemination practice of health and care research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022378793; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=378793. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/45684.

6.
Trials ; 24(1): 75, 2023 Feb 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36726167

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Individuals living with long COVID experience multiple, interacting and fluctuating symptoms which can have a dramatic impact on daily living. The aim of the Long Covid Personalised Self-managemenT support EvaluatioN (LISTEN) trial is to evaluate effects of the LISTEN co-designed self-management support intervention for non-hospitalised people living with long COVID on participation in routine activities, social participation, emotional well-being, quality of life, fatigue, and self-efficacy. Cost-effectiveness will also be evaluated, and a detailed process evaluation carried out to understand how LISTEN is implemented. METHODS: The study is a pragmatic randomised effectiveness and cost-effectiveness trial in which a total of 558 non-hospitalised people with long COVID will be randomised to either the LISTEN intervention or usual care. Recruitment strategies have been developed with input from the LISTEN Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) advisory group and a social enterprise, Diversity and Ability, to ensure inclusivity. Eligible participants can self-refer into the trial via a website or be referred by long COVID services. All participants complete a range of self-reported outcome measures, online, at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months post randomisation (the trial primary end point). Those randomised to the LISTEN intervention are offered up to six one-to-one sessions with LISTEN-trained intervention practitioners and given a co-designed digital resource and paper-based book. A detailed process evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial to inform implementation approaches should the LISTEN intervention be found effective and cost-effective. DISCUSSION: The LISTEN trial is evaluating a co-designed, personalised self-management support intervention (the LISTEN intervention) for non-hospitalised people living with long COVID. The design has incorporated extensive strategies to minimise participant burden and maximise access. Whilst the duration of follow-up is limited, all participants are approached to consent for long-term follow-up (subject to additional funding being secured). TRIAL REGISTRATION: LISTEN ISRCTN36407216. Registered on 27/01/2022.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Autogestão , Humanos , Síndrome de COVID-19 Pós-Aguda , Análise Custo-Benefício , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
7.
PLoS One ; 17(10): e0274469, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36219596

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Long Covid is recognised as a complex condition characterised by multiple, interacting and fluctuating symptoms which impact everyday life in diverse ways. The extent of symptom clusters and variability supports interventions that can accommodate heterogeneity, such as personalised self-management support. This approach is also advocated by people living with long Covid and guidelines published by the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Long Covid Personalised Self-managemenT support co-design and EvaluatioN (LISTEN) is one of 15 research projects funded by the UK's National Institute of Health Research long Covid research programme. LISTEN aims to work with people living with or recovered from long Covid to co-design self-management resources, and a training programme for rehabilitation practitioners to deliver personalised support. The intervention will focus on people not hospitalised for Covid. The protocol presented here details the co-design of the LISTEN intervention which, on completion, will be evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS: The study will utilise an Accelerated Experience-Based Co-Design approach, and involve 30 people from England and Wales with lived experience of long Covid, and 15 rehabilitation practitioners living with, or supporting people with, long Covid. Through online meetings, participants will share their stories of long Covid, their challenges and strategies to live better with or recover from long Covid, their priorities for self-management resources and the practitioner training andcreate, review and refine these resources and the training. Throughout, LISTEN will draw upon the UK standards of public involvement in research. DISCUSSION: If effective and cost-effective, the intervention will be available across the UK's National Health Service. The first of its kind, this study could make a difference to the lives of people with long Covid. To ensure impact, we have developed strategies to involve people from diverse backgrounds and mitigate potential barriers to involvement.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Autogestão , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/terapia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Medicina Estatal , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Síndrome de COVID-19 Pós-Aguda
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA