Factors that influence the implementation of (inter)nationally endorsed health and social care standards: a systematic review and meta-summary.

BACKGROUND: Health and social care standards have been widely adopted as a quality improvement intervention. Standards are typically made up of evidence-based statements that describe safe, high-quality, person-centred care as an outcome or process of care delivery. They involve stakeholders at multiple levels and multiple activities across diverse services. As such, challenges exist with their implementation. Existing literature relating to standards has focused on accreditation and regulation programmes and there is limited evidence to inform implementation strategies specifically tailored to support the implementation of standards. This systematic review aimed to identify and describe the most frequently reported enablers and barriers to implementing (inter)nationally endorsed standards, in order to inform the selection of strategies that can optimise their implementation. METHODS: Database searches were conducted in Medline, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), SocINDEX, Google Scholar, OpenGrey and GreyNet International, complemented by manual searches of standard-setting bodies' websites and hand searching references of included studies. Primary qualitative, quantitative descriptive and mixed methods studies that reported enablers and barriers to implementing nationally or internationally endorsed standards were included. Two researchers independently screened search outcomes and conducted data extraction, methodological appraisal and CERQual (Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) assessments. An inductive analysis was conducted using Sandelowski's meta-summary and measured frequency effect sizes (FES) for enablers and barriers. RESULTS: 4072 papers were retrieved initially with 35 studies ultimately included. Twenty-two thematic statements describing enablers were created from 322 descriptive findings and grouped under six themes. Twenty-four thematic statements describing barriers were created from 376 descriptive findings and grouped under six themes. The most prevalent enablers with CERQual assessments graded as high included: available support tools at local level (FES 55%); training courses to increase awareness and knowledge of the standards (FES 52%) and knowledge sharing and interprofessional collaborations (FES 45%). The most prevalent barriers with CERQual assessments graded as high included: a lack of knowledge of what standards are (FES 63%), staffing constraints (FES 46%), insufficient funds (FES 43%). CONCLUSIONS: The most frequently reported enablers related to available support tools, education and shared learning. The most frequently reported barriers related to a lack of knowledge of standards, staffing issues and insufficient funds. Incorporating these findings into the selection of implementation strategies will enhance the likelihood of effective implementation of standards and subsequently, improve safe, quality care for people using health and social care services.

Definitions of health and social care standards used internationally: A narrative review.

Setting standards is a quality improvement mechanism and an important means for shaping the provision of health and social care services. Standards comprise statements describing a process or outcome of care. Setting standards is a global practice. It would be useful to have an understanding of the underpinning definitions of standards used internationally. Therefore, the aim of this review was to examine definitions of health and social care standards used internationally and identify similarities and differences. A targeted grey literature search of standard-setting bodies' websites and related health legislation was conducted to retrieve explicit definitions of standards. Of 15 standard-setting bodies that were searched, 12 definitions of standards were narratively synthesised. Terms that appeared in two or more of the definitions were extracted. Counts and percentages were calculated for these terms to determine magnitude of use. The commonalities among definitions included 'quality' (n = 6, 50%), 'statements' (n = 5, 42%), 'performance' (n = 5, 42%), and 'measureable' (n = 4, 33%). The less commonly used terms were 'processes' (n = 3, 25%), 'set' (n = 3, 25%), 'evidence based' (n = 2, 17%), 'outcome' (n = 2, 17%), 'safe' (n = 2, 17%), and 'guidance' (n = 2, 17%). Explicit definitions of standards were not retrieved from health legislation documents. Standard-setting bodies develop standards in the context of the health systems in which they are implemented; some are aspirational levels of quality, while others are minimum levels of quality. Researchers, standards developers and policy makers should be cognisant of this when comparing standards between countries.

Prepubertal onset of type 2 diabetes in Shashi-Pena syndrome due to ASXL2 mutation.

Type 2 diabetes remains rare in the pediatric population and the majority of cases occur during puberty. A combination of genetic and environmental factors leads to the development of insulin resistance and ß-cell failure. An increased prevalence is recognized in a number of rare genetic disorders such as Alström and Bardet-Biedl syndromes. Recently, a rare neurodevelopmental disorder, Shashi-Pena syndrome due to the dominant negative effect of heterozygous mutations in additional Sex-Combs-Like Genes 2 (ASXL2) has been reported. ASXL2 null mice exhibit glucose intolerance, insulin resistance and lipodystrophy. The regulatory role of ASXL2 in glucose and lipid homeostasis occurs through its interaction with peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ), a gene implicated in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes on genome-wide association studies. Thiazolidinediones, used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, exert their effects as direct agonists of PPARγ. We report the first case of type 2 diabetes in Shashi-Pena syndrome, occurring in an 8-year-old prepubertal boy with no family history. In addition, the proband had dyslipidemia, and fatty infiltration of the liver with elevated transaminases. Mutation of ASXL2 in humans, through its interaction with PPARγ appears to cause a phenotype of insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, and dyslipidemia. Further reported cases will assist in confirming this association.

Factors that influence the implementation of health and social care Standards: a systematic review and meta-summary protocol.

Health and social care Standards are evidence-based statements that demonstrate a desired level of care. Setting Standards for health and social care is a mechanism by which quality improvements can be achieved. Limited evidence exists on appropriate implementation strategies to overcome challenges with implementing Standards. In order to inform the design of implementation strategies, there is a need to examine factors that influence their implementation. The aim of this protocol is to set out a comprehensive plan to undertake a systematic search, appraisal and mixed research synthesis of the international literature that examines implementation of health and social care Standards. A research question, "What are the enablers and barriers to implementing health and social care Standards in health and social care services?" was designed using the 'SPICE' (Setting, Perspectives, Interest phenomenon of, Comparison, Evaluation) framework. Electronic databases, grey literature and reference lists from included studies will be searched. Primary qualitative, quantitative descriptive and mixed methods studies reporting on enablers and barriers to implementing nationally endorsed Standards, will be included. The review will focus on experiences and perspectives from multi-level stakeholders including patient and public involvement. The quality of studies will be appraised using appropriate tools and findings used to weight interpretation of findings. Search outputs, data extraction and quality appraisal will be undertaken by two reviewers independently. Sandelowski meta-summary will be used to synthesise the data. Frequency and intensity effect sizes of enablers and barriers will be calculated to evaluate their prevalence across the studies. The Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach will be applied to assess confidence in the findings of the review. Findings from this examination will inform influencing factors to implementation. Subsequently, this will contribute to pairing Standards with appropriate implementation strategies that will optimise the enabling factors and overcome challenges to implementation.

Building capacity: getting evidence-based practice into healthcare professional curricula.

Fostering a culture of clinical effectiveness in healthcare is crucial to achieving optimum outcomes for patients. Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a cornerstone of clinical effectiveness. An EBP capacity-building project commenced in Ireland in 2016, in collaboration with the Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine in Oxford. A key part of this project, reported here, was the development of a competency framework for education in EBP and clinical effectiveness to ensure responsiveness of education standards and curricula of healthcare professionals in this area. METHODS: Following a review of national and international reports, professional guidance documents and empirical literature pertaining to clinical effectiveness education (CEE), a preliminary competency framework was developed. Stakeholder consultations were conducted over a 6-month period, which consisted of 13 focus groups (n=45) and included representatives from clinical practice, higher education and professional training sectors, regulator/accrediting bodies, the Department of Health (Ireland) and patient/service user groups. RESULTS: An overarching interprofessional competency framework for CEE was proposed and included the following domains: EBP, quality improvement processes, implementation strategies and collaborative practice: a total of 16 competencies and 60 indicators. CONCLUSION: A competency framework for CEE for health and social care professionals is presented. It is intended that this framework will provide guidance to healthcare educators and regulators in the construction and revision of curricula, learning outcomes, teaching and assessment strategies, and graduate/clinician attributes.

Effects of fixed vs removable orthodontic retainers on stability and periodontal health: 4-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Our objectives were to compare the stability of treatment and periodontal health with fixed vs removable orthodontic retainers over a 4-year period. METHODS: A 4-year follow-up of participants randomly assigned to either mandibular fixed retainers from canine to canine or removable vacuum-formed retainers was undertaken. Irregularity of the mandibular anterior segment, mandibular intercanine and intermolar widths, arch length, and extraction space opening were recorded. Gingival inflammation, calculus and plaque levels, clinical attachment level, and bleeding on probing were assessed. The outcome assessor was blinded when possible. RESULTS: Forty-two participants were included in the analysis, 21 per group. Some relapse occurred in both treatment groups at the 4-year follow-up; however, after adjusting for confounders, the median between-groups difference was 1.64 mm higher in participants wearing vacuum-formed retainers (P = 0.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30, 2.98 mm). No statistical difference was found between the treatment groups in terms of intercanine (P = 0.52; 95% CI, -1.07, 0.55) and intermolar (P = 0.55; 95% CI, -1.72, 0.93) widths, arch length (P = 0.99; 95% CI, -1.15, 1.14), and extraction space opening (P = 0.84; 95% CI, -1.54, 1.86). There was also no statistical difference in relation to periodontal outcomes between the treatment groups, with significant gingival inflammation and plaque levels common findings. CONCLUSIONS: This prolonged study is the first to suggest that fixed retention offers the potential benefit of improved preservation of alignment of the mandibular labial segment in the long term. However, both types of retainers were associated with gingival inflammation and elevated plaque scores.

Assessing the quality of dental clinical practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of published dental clinical guidelines using the AGREE II instrument. METHODS: Online searching of a wide range of organisations (national and International) was undertaken to identify dental clinical practice guidelines published between 2000 and 2014. The quality of each included guideline was assessed in relation to the AGREE II instrument by four assessors independently. Inter-rater agreement was assessed. Descriptive statistics and both univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. RESULTS: 162 guidelines were identified. The overall mean quality score was 51.9% (SD 13.3). There was variation in the reporting quality of individual domains with both Applicability (20.4%) and Editorial Independence (34.25%) poorly reported. Variation between the overall quality scores for guidelines produced by different dental specialities was evident. The quality of guidelines improved per publication year (ß=0.76, 95% CI: 0.26, 1.26, p=0.003). Guidelines based on formal evidence (ß=19.94, 95% CI: 15.25, 24.64, p=0.001) achieved higher quality scores. CONCLUSION: Overall, the quality of clinical dental practice guidelines is suboptimal. There is variation in the overall quality, reporting of individual items and domains of the AGREE II instrument between different dental speciality clinical practice guidelines. Guidelines based on formal evidence achieved higher quality scores. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians should be aware of the variation in the quality of dental clinical guidelines in particular related to methodological rigour. The use of formal evidence may be a useful indicator of their quality prior to their implementation.

Effectiveness of bonded and vacuum-formed retainers: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this prospective trial was to compare the clinical effectiveness of bonded retainers with vacuum-formed retainers, in terms of maintaining the results of orthodontic treatment in the lower arch up to 18 months post debond. METHODS: This was a hospital-based, prospective randomized controlled clinical trial in which a total of 82 subjects were randomly allocated using a computer-generated number sequence to 1 of 2 groups, receiving either a vacuum-formed retainer (Essix Ace plastic (120 mm; DENTSPLY Raintree Essix, Sarasota, Fla) or a bonded retainer (0.0175 coaxial archwire (Ortho-Care, UK, Shipley, United Kingdom) bonded in place with Transbond LR (3M United Kingdom, Brachnell, United Kingdom) for the mandibular arch. Each number was placed in an opaque, concealed envelope and chosen randomly by the study subject; this determined the allocation group. Eligibility criteria included patients nearing debond after treatment with 0.022 × 0.028-in slot size preadjusted edgewise fixed orthodontic appliances whose pretreatment records and study models were available to confirm pretreatment labial segment crowding or spacing and who had clinically acceptable alignment at the end of treatment. The main outcome was to investigate the clinical effectiveness of the 2 types of retainers in terms of changes in incisor irregularity at 6 months of retention. The following measurements were recorded at each time point (6, 12, and 18 months) with a digital caliper: Little's irregularity index, intercanine width, intermolar width, arch length, and extraction site opening. Blinding was applicable only at debond because of the permanence of 1 intervention. RESULTS: The 2 groups were well matched with respect to age, sex, clinical characteristics, and treatment plans. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups for changes in Little's irregularity index at 6 months, with the vacuum-formed retainer group showing greater changes than the bonded retainer group (P = 0.008). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups for changes in Little's irregularity index at 12 and 18 months.There were also no statistically significant changes at any time for intercanine width, intermolar width, arch length, or extraction site opening. CONCLUSIONS: Some relapse is likely after fixed appliance therapy irrespective of retainer choice, and this is minimal in most patients at 6 months after debond. Bonded retainers have a better ability to hold the mandibular incisor alignment in the first 6 months after treatment than do vacuum-formed retainers. REGISTRATION: Not applicable. PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before trial commencement. FUNDING: There is no funding or conflict of interest to be declared.

Patch testing in oral lichenoid lesions of uncertain etiology.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of patch testing patients with oral lichenoid lesions (OLL) is still debated. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the results of patch testing in patients with multiple amalgams and multiple OLL, where the etiology of the oral mucosal disease was unclear. METHODS: Patients referred from an oral medicine clinic were patch tested to the British Society of Cutaneous Allergy standard series, dental and materials series, and, in 1 patient, the dental methacrylate series also. Patients' responses to amalgam removal were assessed during a mean follow-up of 2.6 (range, 0-4.75) years. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients with OLL were referred for patch testing. Ten (32%) patients tested positively to mercury. Eight patients with positive reactions to mercury had amalgam removal, with complete or partial resolution of the OLL in all cases (100%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with OLL of unclear etiology adjacent to large amalgam restorations should be investigated for delayed contact hypersensitivity. Removal of amalgams in patients with positive patch test reactions to mercury results in improvement or resolution of the OLL in most patients.