A rapid review of the evidence on models of service delivery for correctional centre-based mothers and children's units: does our approach need to change?

BACKGROUND: Incarcerated mothers are a marginalised group who experience substantial health and social disadvantage and routinely face disruption of family relationships, including loss of custody of their children. To support the parenting role, mothers and children's units (M&Cs) operate in 97 jurisdictions internationally with approximately 19 000 children reported to be residing with their mothers in custody-based settings. AIM: This rapid review aims to describe the existing evidence regarding the models of service delivery for, and key components of, custodial M&Cs. METHOD: A systematic search was conducted of four electronic databases to identify peer-reviewed literature published from 2010 onwards that reported quantitative and qualitative primary studies focused on custody-based M&Cs. Extracted data included unit components, admission and eligibility criteria, evaluations and recommendations. RESULTS: Of 3075 records identified, 35 met inclusion criteria. M&Cs accommodation was purpose-built, incorporated elements of domestic life and offered a family-like environment. Specific workforce training in caring for children and M&Cs evaluations were largely absent. Our systematic synthesis generated a list of key components for M&C design and service delivery. These components include timely and transparent access to information and knowledge for women, evaluation of the impact of the prison environment on M&C, and organisational opportunities and limitations. CONCLUSION: The next generation of M&Cs requires evidence-based key components that are implemented systematically and is evaluated. To achieve this, the use of codesign is a proven method for developing tailored programmes. Such units must offer a net benefit to both mothers and their children.

Are custodial-based mothers and children's units evaluated, effective and aligned with a human rights-based approach? - A systematic review of the evidence.

Background: Special considerations are warranted for incarcerated mothers and their children, as both experience substantial health and social disadvantage. Children residing in custodial settings are at risk of not having access to the equivalence of education, healthcare and socialisation commensurate to that of children living in the community. This systematic review describes the existing evidence regarding underpinning theories, accessibility, and the effectiveness of custody-based Mothers and children's units (M&Cs) globally. Methods: A systematic database search was conducted on May 1, 2023, of PsycINFO, Scopus, Sociology Ultimate and Web of Science (January 1, 2010, and May 1, 2023). Findings: Our systematic synthesis reveals evidence gaps related to best practice guidelines that align with a human right-based approach, and evaluations of the impact of the prison environment on mothers and their children. Interpretation: These findings support re-design of M&Cs using co-design to develop units that are evidence-based, robustly evaluated, and underpinned by the 'best interest of the child'. Funding: This systematic review was conducted as part of a broader review into M&C programs commissioned and funded by Corrective Services NSW, Australia (CSNSW), a division of the Department of Communities and Justice, as part of the NSW Premier's Priority to Reduce Recidivism within the Women as Parents workstream. No funding was received for this review.

The associations between social determinants of health, mental health, substance-use and recidivism: a ten-year retrospective cohort analysis of women who completed the connections programme in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Women with substance-use issues are overrepresented in prison. Research on women's recidivism often focuses on offending behaviour rather than the health and social circumstances women are experiencing when reimprisonment occurs. This study examines the relationship between social determinants of health (SDOH), mental health, substance-use and recidivism among women exiting prison with histories of substance-use. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of women exiting prison who completed the transitional support programme "Connections" between 2008 and 2018. Recidivism was measured up to two years post-release. Women's support needs were measured at baseline (4 weeks pre-release) and follow-up (four weeks post-release). Ongoing needs in relation to well-established SDOH were calculated if: (1) at baseline women were identified as having a re-entry need with housing, employment, finances, education, domestic violence, child-custody and social support and (2) at follow-up women reported still needing help in that area. Women's self-reported substance-use and mental health since release were captured at follow-up. Descriptive statistics were calculated for all measures. Associations between SDOH, mental health, substance-use and recidivism were estimated by multiple logistic regression, adjusting for potential confounders. We also evaluated the mediating effects of mental health on the relationship between SDOH and substance-use. RESULTS: Substance-use was associated with increased odds of recidivism (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-2.9; p = 0.02). Poor mental health (AOR 2.9, 95% CI 1.9-4.6; p = < 0.01), ongoing social support (AOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.9-5.0; p = < 0.01), child-custody (AOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.0-3.3 p = 0.04), financial (AOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3-3.2; p = < 0.01) and housing (AOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-2.9; p = 0.02) needs were individually associated with increased odds of substance-use. Mediation analysis found mental health fully mediated the effects of ongoing housing (beta efficiency (b) = - 033, standard error (SE) 0.01; p = 0.05), financial (b = 0.15, SE 0.07; p = 0.05), child-custody (b = 0.18, SE 0.01; p = 0.05) and social support (b = 0.36, SE 0.1; p = 0.05) needs onto substance-use, and partially mediated the effects of domestic violence (b = 0.57, SE 0.23; p = 0.05) onto substance-use. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the critical importance of addressing the interplay between SDOH, mental health, substance-use and recidivism. An approach that targets SDOH holds the potential for reducing mental distress and substance-use, and related recidivism.

Developing best practice principles for the provision of programs and services to people transitioning from custody to the community: study protocol for a modified Delphi consensus exercise.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of standard nomenclature and a limited understanding of programmes and services delivered to people in prisons as they transition into the community to support their integration and reduce reoffending related risk factors. The aim of this paper is to outline the protocol for a modified Delphi study designed to develop expert consensus on the nomenclature and best-practice principles of programmes and services for people transitioning from prison into the community. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An online, two-phase modified Delphi process will be conducted to develop an expert consensus on nomenclature and the best-practice principles for these programmes. In the preparatory phase, a questionnaire was developed comprising a list of potential best-practice statements identified from a systematic literature search. Subsequently, a heterogeneous sample of experts including service providers, Community and Justice Services, Not for Profits, First Nations stakeholders, those with lived experience, researchers and healthcare providers will participate in the consensus building phase (online survey rounds and online meeting) to achieve consensus on nomenclature and best-practice principles. Participants will indicate, via Likert scale, to what extent they agree with nomenclature and best-practice statements. If at least 80% of the experts agree to a term or statement (indicated via Likert scale), it will be included in a final list of nomenclature and best-practice statements. Statements will be excluded if 80% experts disagree. Nomenclature and statements not meeting positive or negative consensus will be explored in a facilitated online meeting. Approval from experts will be sought on the final list of nomenclature and best-practice statements. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been received from the Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network Human Research Ethics Committee, the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council Human Research Ethics Committee, the Corrective Services New South Wales Ethics Committee and the University of Newcastle Human Research Ethics Committee. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication.

Cost-effectiveness of clinical interventions for delirium: A systematic literature review of economic evaluations.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the economic value of clinical interventions for delirium. This review aims to synthesise and appraise available economic evidence, including resource use, costs, and cost-effectiveness of interventions for reducing, preventing, and treating delirium. METHODS: Systematic review of published and grey literature on full and partial economic evaluations. Study quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). RESULTS: Fourteen economic evaluations (43% full, 57% partial) across nine multicomponent and nonpharmacological intervention types met inclusion criteria. The intervention costs ranged between US$386 and $553 per person in inpatient settings. Multicomponent delirium prevention intervention and the Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP) reported statistically significant cost savings or cost offsets somewhere else in the health system. Cost savings related to inpatient, outpatient, and out-of-pocket costs ranged between $194 and $6022 per person. The average CHEERS score was 74% (±SD 10%). CONCLUSION: Evidence on a joint distribution of costs and outcomes of delirium interventions was limited, varied and of generally low quality. Directed expansion of health economics towards the evaluation of delirium care is necessary to ensure effective implementation that meets patients' needs and is cost-effective in achieving similar or better outcomes for the same or lower cost.

Stakeholder perspectives of a pilot multicomponent delirium prevention intervention for adult patients with advanced cancer in palliative care units: A behaviour change theory-based qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Theory-based and qualitative evaluations in pilot trials of complex clinical interventions help to understand quantitative results, as well as inform the feasibility and design of subsequent effectiveness and implementation trials. AIM: To explore patient, family, clinician and volunteer ('stakeholder') perspectives of the feasibility and acceptability of a multicomponent non-pharmacological delirium prevention intervention for adult patients with advanced cancer in four Australian palliative care units that participated in a phase II trial, the 'PRESERVE pilot study'. DESIGN: A trial-embedded qualitative study via semi-structured interviews and directed content analysis using Michie's Behaviour Change Wheel and the Theoretical Domains Framework. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-nine people involved in the trial: nurses (n = 17), physicians (n = 6), patients (n = 6), family caregivers (n = 4), physiotherapists (n = 3), a social worker, a pastoral care worker and a volunteer. RESULTS: Participants' perspectives aligned with the 'capability', 'opportunity' and 'motivation' domains of the applied frameworks. Of seven themes, three were around the alignment of the delirium prevention intervention with palliative care (intervention was considered routine care; intervention aligned with the compassionate and collaborative culture of palliative care; and differing views of palliative care priorities influenced perspectives of the intervention) and four were about study processes more directly related to adherence to the intervention (shared knowledge increased engagement with the intervention; impact of the intervention checklist on attention, delivery and documentation of the delirium prevention strategies; clinical roles and responsibilities; and addressing environmental barriers to delirium prevention). CONCLUSION: This theory-informed qualitative study identified multiple influences on the delivery and documentation of a pilot multicomponent non-pharmacological delirium prevention intervention in four palliative care units. Findings inform future definitive studies of delirium prevention in palliative care.Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617001070325; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=373168.

Care partner needs of people with neurodegenerative disorders: What are the needs, and how well do the current assessment tools capture these needs? A systematic meta-review.

OBJECTIVES: The burden on care partners, particularly once dementia emerges, is among the greatest of all caregiving groups. This meta-review aimed to (1) synthesis evidence on the self-reported needs of care partners supporting people living with neurodegenerative disorders; (2) compare the needs according to care partner and care recipient characteristics; and (3) determine the face validity of existing care partner needs assessment tools. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of reviews involving a thematic synthesis of care partner needs and differences in needs according to demographic and other characteristics. We then conducted a gap analysis by identifying the themes of needs from existing needs assessment tools specific to dementia and cross-matching them with the needs derived from the thematic synthesis. RESULTS: Drawing on 17 published reviews, the identified range of needs fell into four key themes: (1) knowledge and information, (2) physical, social and emotional support, (3) care partner self-care, and (4) care recipient needs. Needs may differ according to disease trajectory, relationship to the care recipient, and the demographic characteristics of the care partner and recipient. The 'captured needs' range between 8% and 66% across all the included needs assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS: Current tools do not fully or adequately capture the self-identified needs of care partners of people living with neurodegenerative disorders. Given the high burden on care partners, which has been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 (SARS CoV-2) pandemic, the needs assessment tools should align with the self-reported needs of care partners throughout the caregiving trajectory to better understand unmet needs and target supportive interventions.

Patient and carer experiences of pain care in an Australian regional comprehensive cancer care setting: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Pain is a common and distressing symptom in people living with cancer that requires a patient-centred approach to management. Since 2010, the Australian Government has invested heavily in developing regional cancer centres to improve cancer outcomes. This study explored patient and carer experiences of care from a regional cancer centre with specific reference to cancer pain management. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used with semi-structured telephone interviews. Participants were outpatients at a regional cancer centre in New South Wales who had reported worst pain of 2 or more on a 0-10 numerical rating scale, and their carers. Questions explored experiences of pain assessment and management, and perceptions of how these were affected by the regional setting. Researchers analysed data using a deductive approach, using Mead and Bower's (2000) framework of factors influencing patient-centred care. RESULTS: Eighteen telephone interviews were conducted with 13 patients and 5 carers. Participants perceived that living in a regional setting conferred advantages to the patient-centredness of care via influences at the levels of professional context, the doctor-patient relationship, and consultation. These influences included established and ongoing relationships with a smaller number of care providers who were members of the community, and heightened accessibility in terms of travel/parking, flexible appointments, and ample time spent with each patient. The first of these factors was also perceived to contribute to continuity of care between specialist and primary care providers. However, one negative case reported disagreement between providers and a difficulty accessing specialist pain services. Several participants also reported a preference, and unmet need, for non-pharmacological rather than pharmacological pain management. CONCLUSION: While much research has focused on lack of services and poorer outcomes for people with cancer in rural areas, the Australian regional setting may offer benefits to the patient-centredness of cancer pain management and continuity of care. More research is needed to better understand the benefits and trade-offs of cancer care in regional versus urban settings, and how each can learn from the other. An unmet need for non-pharmacological rather than pharmacological pain management is among the most consistent findings of qualitative studies of patient/carer preferences across settings.

A systematic review of post-release programs for women exiting prison with substance-use disorders: assessing current programs and weighing the evidence.

BACKGROUND: The rising rates of women in prison is a serious public health issue. Unlike men, women in prison are characterised by significant histories of trauma, poor mental health, and high rates of substance use disorders (SUDs). Recidivism rates of women have also increased exponentially in the last decade, with substance related offences being the most imprisoned offence worldwide. There is a lack of evidence of the effectiveness of post-release programs for women. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesise and evaluate the evidence on post-release programs for women exiting prison with SUDs. METHODS: We searched eight scientific databases for empirical original research published in English with no date limitation. Studies with an objective to reduce recidivism for adult women (⩾18 years) with a SUD were included. Study quality was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools. RESULTS: Of the 1493 articles, twelve (n = 3799 women) met the inclusion criteria. Recidivism was significantly reduced in five (42%) programs and substance-use was significantly reduced in one (8.3%) program. Common attributes among programs that reduced recidivism were: transitional, gender-responsive programs; provision of individualised support; providing substance-related therapy, mental health and trauma treatment services. Methodological and reporting biases were common, which impacted our ability to synthesize results further. Recidivism was inconsistently measured across studies further impacting the ability to compare results across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Recidivism is a problematic measure of program efficacy because it is inconsistently measured and deficit-focused, unrecognising of women's gains in the post-release period despite lack of tailored programs and significant health and social disadvantages. The current evidence suggests that women benefit from continuity of care from prison to the community, which incorporated gender-responsive programming and individualised case management that targeted co-morbid mental health and SUDs. Future program design should incorporate these attributes of successful programs identified in this review to better address the unique challenges that women with SUDs face when they transition back into the community.

Older Persons' and Their Caregivers' Perspectives and Experiences of Research Participation With Impaired Decision-Making Capacity: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Human research ethics statements support the equitable inclusion of diverse groups. Yet older people are underrepresented in clinical research, especially those with impaired decision-making capacity. The aim of this study was to identify the perspectives and experiences of older persons and their caregivers of research participation with impaired decision-making capacity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Scoping review of the literature and online sources in January-February 2019 (updated June 2020) according to Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. English-language peer-reviewed research articles and Australian online narratives were included. Data were tabulated and narratively synthesized. RESULTS: From 4,171 database records and 93 online resources, 22 articles (2000-2019, 82% United States, 16 first authors) and one YouTube webinar (2018) were initially included; updated searches yielded an additional article (2020) and YouTube webinar (2020). Studies were heterogeneous in terminology, methods, and foci, with hypothetical scenarios, quantitative analyses, and examination of proxy consent predominating. Participants (N = 7,331) were older persons (71%), caregivers of older persons with dementia/cognitive impairment (23%), and older persons with dementia/cognitive impairment (6%). Synthesis identified 2 themes: willingness to participate and decision-making approaches. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Research participation by older persons with dementia may be optimized through reducing risks and burdens and increasing benefits for participants, greater consumer input into study development, and shared and supported decision-making. Older persons' and caregivers' perspectives and experiences of research participation with impaired decision-making capacity require investigation in a greater range of countries and conditions other than dementia, and dissemination through more varied media.

A Multicomponent Nonpharmacological Intervention to Prevent Delirium for Hospitalized People with Advanced Cancer: A Phase II Cluster Randomized Waitlist Controlled Trial (The PRESERVE Pilot Study).

Background: Delirium is a common debilitating complication of advanced cancer. Objective: To determine if a multicomponent nonpharmacological delirium prevention intervention was feasible for adult patients with advanced cancer, before a phase III (efficacy) trial. Design: Phase II (feasibility) cluster randomized controlled trial. All sites implemented delirium screening and diagnostic assessment. Strategies within sleep, vision and hearing, hydration, orientation, mobility, and family domains were delivered to enrolled patients at intervention site admission days 1-7. Control sites then implemented the intervention ("waitlist sites"). Setting: Four Australian palliative care units. Measurements: The primary outcome was adherence, with an a priori endpoint of at least 60% patients achieving full adherence. Secondary outcomes were interdisciplinary care delivery, delirium measures, and adverse events, analyzed descriptively and inferentially. Results: Sixty-five enrolled patients (25 control, 20 intervention, and 20 waitlist) had 98% delirium screens and 75% diagnostic assessments completed. Nurses (67%), physicians (16%), allied health (8.4%), family (7%), patients (1%), and volunteers (0.5%) delivered the intervention. There was full adherence for 5% patients at intervention sites, partial for 25%. Both full and partial adherence were higher at waitlist sites: 25% and 45%, respectively. One-third of control site patients (32%) became delirious within seven days of admission compared to one-fifth (20%) at both intervention and waitlist sites (p = 0.5). Mean (standard deviation) Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-1998 scores were 16.8 + 12.0 control sites versus 18.4 + 8.2 (p = 0.6) intervention and 18.7 + 7.8 (p = 0.5) waitlist sites. The intervention caused no adverse events. Conclusion: The intervention requires modification for optimal adherence in a phase III trial.

Participatory Action Research Applied to an Ear, Nose, and Throat Specialty Service Redesign in Remote Australia: A Mixed-Methods Study of Key Stakeholder Perspectives.

This mixed-methods study reports on the key stakeholders' perspectives on the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) service redesign in remote Australia, using a participatory action research (PAR) approach. A primary health care (PHC) clinician survey was conducted to assess local needs and possible educational gaps in clinical knowledge. This was followed by an internal stakeholder forum and a follow-up survey with Torres and Cape Hospital and Health Service staff to gain their perspectives on current service delivery and table ideas for a new ENT health service model. Qualitative data were analyzed inductively and grouped in emerging themes. Quantitative data were imported into tables and analyzed descriptively. PAR allowed for input from 19 PHC clinicians, 10 face-to-face stakeholders perspectives, and 18 stakeholder follow-up survey respondents. Four themes emerged: 1. Training for health workers in ENT management; 2. Improved local service access; 3. New referral pathways to improve continuity of care; and 4. Introduction of telehealth. PAR engaged key stakeholders, identifying gaps in ENT service delivery, and guided the development of the new service model. The inclusion of stakeholders throughout the service redesign process is likely to create a more sustainable model of care which already has local "buy-in".

Inclusion, characteristics and outcomes of people requiring palliative care in studies of non-pharmacological interventions for delirium: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common, distressing, serious and under-researched in specialist palliative care settings. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether people requiring palliative care were included in non-pharmacological delirium intervention studies in inpatient settings, how they were characterised and what their outcomes were. DESIGN: Systematic review (PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017062178). DATA SOURCES: Systematic search in March 2017 for non-pharmacological delirium intervention studies in adult inpatients. Database search terms were 'delirium', 'hospitalisation', 'inpatient', 'palliative care', 'hospice', 'critical care' and 'geriatrics'. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodological checklists guided risk of bias assessment. RESULTS: The 29 included studies were conducted between 1994 and 2015 in diverse settings in 15 countries (9136 participants, mean age = 76.5 years (SD = 8.1), 56% women). Most studies tested multicomponent interventions (n = 26) to prevent delirium (n = 19). Three-quarters of the 29 included studies (n = 22) excluded various groups of people requiring palliative care; however, inclusion criteria, participant diagnoses, illness severity and mortality indicated their presence in almost all studies (n = 26). Of these, 21 studies did not characterise participants requiring palliative care or report their specific outcomes (72%), four reported outcomes for older people with frailty, dementia, cancer and comorbidities, and one was explicitly focused on people receiving palliative care. Study heterogeneity and limitations precluded definitive determination of intervention effectiveness and only allowed interpretations of feasibility for people requiring palliative care. Acceptability outcomes (intervention adverse events and patients' subjective experience) were rarely reported overall. CONCLUSION: Non-pharmacological delirium interventions have frequently excluded and under-characterised people requiring palliative care and infrequently reported their outcomes.

Multicomponent non-pharmacological intervention to prevent delirium for hospitalised people with advanced cancer: study protocol for a phase II cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Delirium is a significant medical complication for hospitalised patients. Up to one-third of delirium episodes are preventable in older inpatients through non-pharmacological strategies that support essential human needs, such as physical and cognitive activity, sleep, hydration, vision and hearing. We hypothesised that a multicomponent intervention similarly may decrease delirium incidence, and/or its duration and severity, in inpatients with advanced cancer. Prior to a phase III trial, we aimed to determine if a multicomponent non-pharmacological delirium prevention intervention is feasible and acceptable for this specific inpatient group. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is a phase II cluster randomised wait-listed controlled trial involving inpatients with advanced cancer at four Australian palliative care inpatient units. Intervention sites will introduce delirium screening, diagnostic assessment and a multicomponent delirium prevention intervention with six domains of care: preserving natural sleep; maintaining optimal vision and hearing; optimising hydration; promoting communication, orientation and cognition; optimising mobility; and promoting family partnership. Interdisciplinary teams will tailor intervention delivery to each site and to patient need. Control sites will first introduce only delirium screening and diagnosis, later implementing the intervention, modified according to initial results. The primary outcome is adherence to the intervention during the first seven days of admission, measured for 40 consecutively admitted eligible patients. Secondary outcomes relate to fidelity and feasibility, acceptability and sustainability of the study intervention, processes and measures in this patient population, using quantitative and qualitative measures. Delirium incidence and severity will be measured to inform power calculations for a future phase III trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained for all four sites. Trial results, qualitative substudy findings and implementation of the intervention will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, and reported at conferences, to study sites and key peak bodies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12617001070325; Pre-results.