Dehydration and Malnutrition in Residential Care: Recommendations for Strategies for Improving Practice Derived from a Scoping Review of Existing Policies and Guidelines.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bunn D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6371146 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundIncreasing numbers of family carers are providing informal care in community settings. This creates a number of challenges because family carers are at risk of poor physical and psychological health outcomes, with consequences both for themselves and those for whom they provide care. General Practitioners (GPs), who play a central role in community-based care, are ideally positioned to identify, assess, and signpost carers to supports. However, there is a significant gap in the literature in respect of appropriate guidance and resources to support them in this role.MethodsA scoping review was undertaken to examine clinical guidelines and recommendations for GPs to support them in their role with family carers. This involved a multidisciplinary team, in line with Arksey & O'Malley's framework, and entailed searches of ten peer-reviewed databases and grey literature between September-November 2020.ResultsThe searches yielded a total of 4,651 English language papers, 35 of which met the criteria for inclusion after removing duplicates, screening titles and abstracts, and performing full-text readings. Ten papers focused on resources/guidelines for GPs, twenty were research papers, three were review papers, one was a framework of quality markers for carer support, and one was an editorial. Data synthesis indicated that nine (90%) of the guidelines included some elements relating to the identification, assessment, and/or signposting of carers. Key strategies for identifying carers suggest that a whole practice approach is optimal, incorporating a role for the GP, practice staff, and for the use of appropriate supporting documentation. Important knowledge gaps were highlighted in respect of appropriate clinical assessment and evidence-based signposting pathways.ConclusionOur review addresses a significant gap in the literature by providing an important synthesis of current available evidence on clinical guidelines for GPs in supporting family carers, including strategies for identification, options for assessment and potential referral/signposting routes. However, there is a need for greater transparency of the existing evidence base as well as much more research to evaluate the effectiveness and increase the routine utilisation, of clinical guidelines in primary care.
| S-EPMC10626724 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPolicymakers and health professionals prefer to use summarized evidence of practice recommendations. The aim of this scoping review is therefore to identify available guidelines, consensus statements, the standard of practice, and practice recommendations on reproductive health service provision during the COVID-19 pandemics.MethodsWe searched guideline databases and websites of professional associations and international organizations working on sexual and reproductive health. We looked for practice recommendations on sexual reproductive health services (SRH) during COVID-19 pandemics. Additionally, we searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Data extraction was done by two independent reviewers using a customized tool that was developed to record the key information of the source that's relevant to the review question. The difference between the two authors on data extraction was resolved by discussion.ResultsA total of 21 records were included in the review. Identified recommendations were classified into thematic areas. The records addressed approaches to antenatal care, labour and delivery, postnatal care, safe abortion, contraception, gender-based violence, and artificial reproduction.ConclusionsThere were consistent consensus statements and recommendations that there should be access to sexual and reproductive health services like antenatal care (ANC), postnatal care (PNC), contraception service, safe abortion care, and clinical management of rape survivors during the COVID-19 pandemics with the concerted effort of service re-organization. The practice recommendations focus on innovative ways of service provision to minimize patient and staff exposure to COVID-19 as well as alleviate the burden on the health care system. These include utilizing telemedicine and community/home-based care or self-care.
| S-EPMC7856605 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are statements that should be rigorously developed to guide clinicians' decision-making. However, given the scarce evidence for certain vulnerable groups like children, CPGs' recommendations formulation could be challenging.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of CPGs for COVID-19 management in children. Documents were included if they claimed to be a "clinical practice guideline", published between January and October 2021, and described the process followed to issue their recommendations. We assessed the quality using the "Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II" (AGREE-II) and described how the recommendations were reached.ResultsWe found five CPGs that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The median score on the overall AGREE-II evaluation was 61% (range: 49%-72%), and the score on the third domain referred to the rigor of methodological development was 52% (range: 25%-88%). Recommendations for remdesivir, tocilizumab, and intravenous immunoglobulin were heterogeneous across CPGs (in favor, against, no recommendation), as well as the methodologies used to present the evidence, perform the benefits/harms balance, and issue the recommendation.ConclusionsHeterogeneous recommendations and justifications across CPGs were found in the three assessed topics. Future CPGs should describe in detail their evidence-to-decision process to issue reliable and transparent recommendations.
| S-EPMC9077803 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe optimal therapeutic regimen for managing childhood idiopathic nephrotic syndrome (INS) is still under debate. We have evaluated the choice of steroid regimen and of symptomatic treatment adopted by pediatricians and pediatric nephrologists in a large number of centers as the first step towards establishing a shared protocolMethodsThis was a multicenter, retrospective study. A total of 231 children (132 admitted to pediatric units) aged 6 months to <15 years who presented with onset of nephrotic syndrome to 54 pediatric units and six pediatric nephrology units in Italy between 2007 and 2009 were eligible for entry into the study.ResultsMedian steroid dosing was 55 (range 27-75) mg/m(2)/day. The overall median cumulative dose regimen for the first episode was 3,440 (1,904-6,035) mg/m(2), and the median duration of the therapeutic regimen was 21 (9-48) weeks. The total duration and cumulative steroid dose were significantly higher in patients treated by pediatricians than in those treated by pediatric nephrologists (p = 0.001 and p = 0.008). Among the patient cohort, 55, 64 and 22 % received albumin infusions, diuretics and acetyl salicylic acid treatment, respectively, but the laboratory and clinical data did not differ between children treated or not treated with symptomatic drugs. Albumin and diuretic use did not vary between patients in pediatric units and those in pediatric nephrology units.ConclusionsThis study shows major differences in steroid and symptomatic treatment of nephrotic syndrome by pediatricians and pediatric nephrologists. As these differences can influence the efficacy of the treatments and the appearance of side-effects, shared guidelines and their implementation through widespread educational activities are necessary.
| S-EPMC4240913 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundScholarly journals play a key role in the dissemination of research findings. However, little focus is given to the process of establishing new, credible journals and the obstacles faced in achieving this. This scoping review aimed to identify and describe existing recommendations for starting a biomedical scholarly journal.MethodsWe searched five bibliographic databases: OVID Medline + Medline in Process, Embase Classic + Embase, ERIC, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science on January 14, 2022. A related grey literature search was conducted on March 19, 2022. Eligible sources were those published in English in any year, of any format, and that described guidance for starting a biomedical journal. Titles and abstracts of obtained sources were screened. We extracted descriptive characteristics including author name, year and country of publication, journal name, and source type, and any recommendations from the included sources discussing guidance for starting a biomedical journal. These recommendations were categorized and thematically grouped.ResultsA total of 5626 unique sources were obtained. Thirty-three sources met our inclusion criteria. Most sources were blog posts (10/33; 30.30%), and only 10 sources were supported by evidence. We extracted 51 unique recommendations from these 33 sources, which we thematically classified into nine themes which were: journal operations, editorial review processes, peer review processes, open access publishing, copyediting/typesetting, production, archiving/indexing/metrics, marketing/promotion, and funding.ConclusionsThere is little formal guidance regarding how to start a scholarly journal. The development of an evidence-based guideline may help uphold scholarly publishing quality, provide insight into obstacles new journals will face, and equip novice publishers with the tools to meet best practices.
| S-EPMC10065279 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConflicts of interest (COI) jeopardize the validity of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs). When the Institute of Medicine promulgated COI policies in 2011, few organizations met these requirements, but it is unknown if organizations have improved their policies since that time. We sought to evaluate current adherence to IOM standards of COI policies.Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective document review of COI policies and CPGs from organizations that published five or more CPGs between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. Organizations were identified via CPG databases. COI policies were obtained from an internet search. We collected data on i) the number of organizations that have COI policies specific to CPG development, ii) the number of policies meeting each IOM standard and iii) the number of IOM standards met by each policy. COI disclosures from five CPGs of each organization were assessed for adherence to IOM standards. Among the 46 organizations that published 5 or more CPGs, 36 (78%) had a COI policy. Standard 2.2b (requiring divestment of financial COI) was met least frequently, by 2 of 36 (6%) organizations. Standard 2.1 (requiring disclosure of COI) was met most frequently, by 33 of 36 (92%) organizations. A total of 31 of 36 (86%) organizations met 4 or fewer of the 7 IOM standards. Among the 16 organizations limiting COI to a minority of the CPG panel (standard 2.4c) and the 15 organizations prohibiting COI among chairs or co-chairs (standard 2.4d), 12 (75%) and 10 (67%) organizations violated the respective standard in at least one CPG. The main limitations of our study are the exclusion of organizations producing fewer CPGs and ability to assess only publicly available policies.ConclusionAmong organizations producing CPGs, COI policies frequently do not meet IOM standards, and organizations often violate their own policies. These shortcomings may undermine the public trust in and thus the utility of CPGs. CPG-producing organizations should improve their COI policies and their strategies to manage COI to increase the trustworthiness of CPGs.
| S-EPMC8087455 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop and encourage the adoption of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for smoking cessation in Canada by engaging stakeholders in the adaptation of existing high-quality CPGs using principles of the ADAPTE framework.MethodsAn independent expert body in guideline review conducted a review and identified six existing CPGs, which met a priori criteria for quality and potential applicability to the local context. Summary statements were extracted and assigned a grade of recommendation and level of evidence by a second expert panel. Regional knowledge exchange brokers recruited additional stakeholders to build a multidisciplinary network of over 800 clinicians, researchers and decision-makers from across Canada. This interprofessional network and other stakeholders were offered various opportunities to provide input on the guideline both online and in person. We actively encouraged end-user input into the development and adaptation of the guidelines to ensure applicability to various practice settings and to promote adoption.ResultsThe final guideline contained 24 summary statements along with supporting clinical considerations, across six topic area sections. The guideline was adopted by various provincial/territorial and national government and non-governmental organisations.ConclusionsThis method can be applied in other jurisdictions to adapt existing high-quality smoking cessation CPGs to the local context and to facilitate subsequent adoption by various stakeholders.
| S-EPMC5722096 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Evidence-based practice (EBP) may help improve healthcare quality. However, not all healthcare professionals and managers use EBP in their daily practice. We systematically reviewed the literature to summarise self-reported appreciation of EBP and organisational infrastructure solutions proposed to promote EBP.Systematic review. Two investigators independently performed the systematic reviewing process.MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for publications between 2000 and 2011.Reviews and surveys of EBP attitude, knowledge, awareness, skills, barriers and facilitators among managers, doctors and nurses in clinical settings.We found 31 surveys of fairly good quality. General attitude towards EBP was welcoming. Respondents perceived several barriers, but also many facilitators for EBP implementation. Solutions were proposed at various organisational levels, including (inter)national associations and hospital management promoting EBP, pregraduate and postgraduate education, as well as individual support by EBP mentors on the wards to move EBP from the classroom to the bedside.More than 20 years after its introduction, the EBP paradigm has been embraced by healthcare professionals as an important means to improve quality of patient care, but its implementation is still deficient. Policy exerted at microlevel , middlelevel and macrolevel, and supported by professional, educational and managerial role models, may further facilitate EBP.
| S-EPMC3563143 | biostudies-other
Project description:ImportancePrimary care clinicians, who are increasingly responsible for caring for the growing population of cancer survivors, may be unfamiliar with appropriate cancer surveillance strategies. Clinical practice guidelines can inform cancer follow-up care and surveillance testing. Vague recommendations and inconsistencies among guidelines can lead to overuse and underuse of health care resources and have a negative impact on cost and quality of survivorship care.ObjectiveTo examine the specificity and consistency of recommendations for surveillance after active treatment across cancer guidelines.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cross-sectional analysis of national cancer guidelines from North America and Europe published since 2010 addressing posttreatment care for survivors of the 9 most common cancers. We categorized surveillance modalities into history and physical examinations, tumor markers, diagnostic procedures (eg, colonoscopy), and imaging. Within each guideline, we classified individual recommendations into 5 categories: (1) risk-based recommendation, (2) recommendation for surveillance, (3) addressed but no clear recommendation, (4) recommendation against surveillance, or (5) cases in which surveillance was not addressed. We reviewed each surveillance recommendation for frequency and a stop date, evaluated consistency among guidelines, and analyzed associations between the organizations proposing the guidelines and recommendation characteristics.Main outcomes and measuresDescription of guideline recommendations for cancer surveillance.ResultsWe identified 41 guidelines published between January 1, 2010, and March 1, 2016. Eighty-five percent of guidelines (35) were from professional organizations. Ambiguous recommendations (ie, modality not discussed or discussed without a clear recommendation) were present in 83% of guidelines (34), and 44% (18) recommended against at least 1 test. European guidelines were more likely than North American guidelines to contain ambiguous recommendations (100% vs 68%; P < .01). Recommendations commonly specified testing frequency (from 88% [14 of 16] for tumor markers to 92% [24 of 26] for procedures and/or imaging) but infrequently provided a definitive stop time. Cross-sectional imaging recommendations varied among guidelines for each cancer. For example, among breast cancer guidelines, surveillance computed tomographic scans were recommended against in 2, discussed without a clear recommendation in 1, and not addressed in 3 guidelines.Conclusions and relevanceGuidelines addressing the care of cancer survivors have low specificity and consistency. As guidelines continue to be revised, developers should clarify recommendations with simple, nonambiguous, definitive language for or against the use of specific tests to optimize care quality and resource utilization.
| S-EPMC5590752 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for interventions in management of osteoarthritis (OA) and to provide a synthesis of high-quality CPG recommendations.MethodsFive databases (OvidSP Medline, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL], Embase, and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database [PEDro]) and 4 online guideline repositories were searched. CPGs for the management of OA were included if they were 1) written in English and published from January 2015 to February 2022, focused on adults age ≥18 years, and met the criteria of a CPG as defined by the Institute of Medicine; and 2) were rated as high quality on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. CPGs for OA were excluded if they were available via institutional access only, only addressed recommendations for the system/organization of care and did not include interventional management recommendations, and/or included other arthritic conditions.ResultsOf 20 eligible CPGs, 11 were appraised as high quality and included in the synthesis. Of interest were the hip, knee, hand, and glenohumeral joints and/or polyarticular OA. Consistent recommendations were that care should be patient centered and include exercise, education, and weight loss (where appropriate). Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and surgical interventions were recommended for disabling OA that had not improved with nonsurgical care. Hand orthoses should be recommended for patients with hand OA.ConclusionThis synthesis of high-quality CPGs for OA management offers health care providers with clear, simple guidance of recommended OA care to improve patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC10952362 | biostudies-literature