Dataset Information

Barriers and facilitators associated with steps of the HIV care cascade for migrants in OECD countries: a systematic mixed studies review protocol.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:In 2019, the United Nations signalled a substantial rise in the number of international migrants, up to 272 million globally, about half of which move to only 10 countries, including 8 member nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Migrants in OECD countries are often at higher risk for acquiring HIV and have a higher frequency of delayed HIV diagnosis. The barriers and facilitators that migrant people living with HIV (PLWH) in OECD countries face in relation to HIV care are insufficiently understood. The five-step HIV Care Cascade Continuum (HCCC) is an effective model to identify gaps, barriers and facilitators associated with HIV care. The purpose of this study is to generate a comprehensive, multilevel understanding of barriers and facilitators regarding the five steps of the HCCC model in OECD countries by migration status. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A systematic mixed studies review using a data-based convergent design will be conducted. Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library will be searched on 25 March 2020. Screening and critical appraisal will be conducted independently by the first author. Authors 3-5 will act as second reviewers, each independently conducting 33% of the screening and appraisal. Quantitative data will be transformed to qualitative data and be synthesised using thematic analysis. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool will be used for quality assessment. An advisory committee, composed of four migrant PLWH, will be involved in screening and appraising 5% of articles to build knowledge and experience with systematic reviews. They will also be involved in analysis and dissemination. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethics approval was obtained from the McGill University Health Centre (15-188-MUHC, 2016-1697, eReviews 4688). Publications arising from this study will be open-access. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42020172122.

SUBMITTER: Arora A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7651739 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Barriers and facilitators associated with steps of the HIV care cascade for migrants in OECD countries: a systematic mixed studies review protocol.

Arora Anish A Quesnel-Vallee Amelie A Lessard David D Mate Kedar K Rodriguez-Cruz Adriana A Kronfli Nadine N Engler Kim K Vedel Isabelle I Lebouché Bertrand B

BMJ open 20201106 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>In 2019, the United Nations signalled a substantial rise in the number of international migrants, up to 272 million globally, about half of which move to only 10 countries, including 8 member nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Migrants in OECD countries are often at higher risk for acquiring HIV and have a higher frequency of delayed HIV diagnosis. The barriers and facilitators that migrant people living with HIV (PLWH) in OECD coun ...[more]

PMID: 33158835

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEngagement in care is important for people living with HIV (PLH) to achieve optimal outcomes. Several strategies have been developed to improve client flow through the HIV care cascade, specifically targeting initiation of treatment, adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART), retention in care, and engagement in care. We have previously identified effective care cascade strategies in a systematic review. Initiation of ART could be improved by mobile health interventions, and changes in healthcare delivery. Adherence to ART could be improved by mobile health interventions, incentives, counselling, and psychotherapy. Retention in care could be improved by mobile health interventions, incentives, education, and electronic interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate barriers and facilitators to implementing these effective interventions in HIV clinics in Ontario, Canada.MethodsWe conducted a sequential explanatory mixed methods study. In the quantitative strand, we administered a survey to health workers who provide care to PLH to identify barriers and facilitators. In the qualitative strand, we conducted in-depth interviews informed by the theoretical domains framework (TDF) with health workers and with PLH to explain our quantitative findings. Qualitative and quantitative data were merged to create meta-inferences.ResultsTwenty health workers from 8 clinics in 9 cities in Ontario took the survey. Nine PLH and 10 health workers participated in the qualitative interviews. Clinics in Ontario implemented all the effective interventions identified from the literature for initiation of treatment, adherence to ART, and retention in care despite concerns about resources. Barriers to physical and financial access to care, the workload for tailored care, and expertise were identified by both health workers and PLH. Key facilitators were virtual care and client preparedness through education and peer support.ConclusionClinics in Ontario appear to implement several evidence-based strategies to improve PLH engagement. There is a need for more health workers with skills to address unique PLH needs. Virtual care is beneficial to both health workers and PLH.

Project description:Objectives: To identify perceived influences on implementation of antibiotic stewardship programmes (ASPs) in hospitals, across healthcare systems, and to exemplify the use of a behavioral framework to conceptualize those influences. Methods: EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched from 01/2001 to 07/2017 and reference lists were screened for transnational studies that reported barriers and/or facilitators to implementing actual or hypothetical ASPs or ASP-supporting strategies. Extracted data were synthesized using content analysis with the Theoretical Domains Framework as an organizing framework. Commonly reported influences were quantified. Results: From 3,196 abstracts 75 full-text articles were screened for inclusion. Eight studies met the eligibility criteria. The number of countries involved in each study ranged from 2 to 36. These studies included a total of 1849 participants. North America, Europe and Australasia had the strongest representation. Participants were members of special interest groups, designated hospital representatives or clinical experts. Ten of the 14 theoretical domains in the framework were present in the results reported in the included studies. The most commonly reported (≥4 out of 8 studies) influences on ASP implementation were coded in the domain "environmental context and resources" (e.g., problems with data and information systems; lack of key personnel; inadequate financial resources) and "goals" (other higher priorities). Conclusions: Despite an extensive transnational research effort, there is evidence from international studies of substantial barriers to implementing ASPs in hospitals, even in developed countries. Large-scale efforts to implement hospital antibiotic stewardship in those countries will need to overcome issues around inadequacy of information systems, unavailability of key personnel and funding, and the competition from other priority initiatives. We have enhanced the evidence base to inform guidance by taking a behavioral approach to identify influences on ASP uptake. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42017076425.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Anorexia nervosa is a serious disorder, which often takes a chronic course. Early treatment leads to a significantly better prognosis and prevents chronicity. However, existing evidence on facilitators and barriers in anorexia nervosa treatment initiation is scarce. AIMS:Against this background, the FABIANA study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03713541) aims to (a) identify potentially modifiable facilitators and barriers from the perspectives of adolescent and adult patients with anorexia nervosa, carers and physicians, (b) develop and test an instrument for the combined assessment of multiple key facilitators and barriers, and (c) quantify the effect of potentially modifiable versus non-modifiable key facilitators and barriers on the duration of untreated illness (DUI) in patients with anorexia nervosa. METHOD:FABIANA is an observational, mixed-method-study divided into three consecutive substudies each corresponding to one of the study aims. All three substudies will include female patients with anorexia nervosa aged 14 years and older at the beginning of their first psychotherapeutic anorexia nervosa treatment. The qualitative substudy I and the quantitative substudy III will additionally include carers and involved physicians. The recruitment will take place at 20 cooperating study centres throughout Germany, which provide in-patient or out-patient anorexia nervosa specialist care. The DUI will be calculated based on the month of illness onset as determined in validated interviews on lifetime anorexia nervosa symptoms and the therapist-reported date of treatment initiation. CONCLUSIONS:Strengths and limitations of the retrospective assessment of the DUI will be discussed. The findings of the FABIANA study will contribute to the development of evidence-based early-intervention approaches and the prevention of a chronic course of illness. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03713541. DECLARATION OF INTEREST:None.

Project description:BackgroundMenu labelling is continuing to gather public and legislative support as one of the potential environmental strategies for addressing the obesity pandemic. However, issues relating to implementation have been reported in countries where menu labelling has been introduced on a voluntary or mandatory basis. The aim of this mixed methods systematic review is to synthesise the empirical evidence on the barriers and facilitators to implementation of menu labelling interventions to support healthy food choices.MethodsThis review will use the 'best fit' framework synthesis approach to synthesise qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods evidence. Peer-reviewed publications will be accessed through PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Scopus. Grey literature will be accessed through Google Scholar, OpenGrey, RIAN, EThOS, ProQuest, WorldCat, Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, and public health organisation websites. Screening reference lists, citation chaining and contacting authors of all included studies will be undertaken. There will be no restriction on menu labelling scheme or format, publication year or language; however, only primary research studies relevant to supply-side stakeholders will be eligible for inclusion. Study quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. At least two independent reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal; if consensus is required, another independent reviewer will be consulted. A combination of deductive coding, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research as the a priori framework, and inductive analysis, using secondary thematic analysis, will be used. The overall process will assist in the construction of a new evidence-based conceptual model regarding the implementation of menu labelling interventions. The new model will be assessed for bias and a sensitivity analysis performed.DiscussionGiven the growing consensus that a systemic, sustained portfolio of obesity prevention strategies, delivered at scale, is needed to address the obesity epidemic, greater understanding of the practical issues relating to implementation of such strategies is required. Findings from this review will be used to develop a set of best-practice guidelines to enhance the adoption, implementation and sustainability of menu labelling interventions across countries worldwide.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42017083306.

Project description:BackgroundLung-protective ventilation (LPV) improves outcomes for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) through the administration of low tidal volumes (≤ 6.5 ml/kg predicted body weight [PBW]) with co-titration of positive end-expiratory pressure and fraction of inspired oxygen. Many patients with ARDS, however, are not managed with LPV. The purpose of this study was to understand the implementation barriers and facilitators to the use of LPV and a computerized LPV clinical decision support (CDS) tool in intensive care units (ICUs) in preparation for a pilot hybrid implementation-effectiveness clinical trial.MethodsWe performed an explanatory sequential mixed methods study from June 2018 to March 2019 to evaluate the variation in LPV adherence across 17 ICUs in an integrated healthcare system with > 4000 mechanically ventilated patients annually. We analyzed 47 key informant interviews of ICU physicians, respiratory therapists (RTs), and nurses in 3 of the ICUs using a qualitative content analysis paradigm to investigate site variation as defined by adherence level (low, medium, high) and to identify barriers and facilitators to LPV and LPV CDS tool use.ResultsForty-two percent of patients had an initial set tidal volume of ≤ 6.5 ml/kg PBW during the measurement period (site range 21-80%). LPV CDS tool use was 28% (site range 6-91%). This study's main findings revealed multi-factorial facilitators and barriers to use that varied by ICU site adherence level. The primary facilitator was that LPV and the LPV CDS tool could be used on all mechanically ventilated patients. Barriers included a persistent gap between clinician attitudes regarding the use of LPV and actual use, the perceived loss of autonomy associated with using a computerized protocol, the nature of physician-RT interaction in ventilation management, and the lack of clear organization measures of success.ConclusionsVariation in adherence to LPV persists in ICUs within a healthcare delivery system that was an early adopter of LPV. Potentially promising strategies to increase adherence to LPV and the LPV CDS tool for ARDS patients include initiating low tidal ventilation on all mechanically ventilated patients, establishing and measuring adherence measures, and focused education addressing the physician-RT interaction. These strategies represent a blueprint for a future hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial.

Project description:BackgroundThere are widespread concerns that ethnic minorities and migrants may have inadequate access to COVID-19 vaccines. . Improving vaccine uptake among these vulnerable groups is important towards controlling the spread of COVID-19 and reducing unnecessary mortality. Here we perform a systematic review of ethnic minorities' and migrants' access to and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsWe searched PubMed and Web of Science databases for papers published between 1 January 2020 and 7 October 2021. Studies were included if they were peer-reviewed articles; written in English, included data or estimates of ethnic minorities' or migrants' access to vaccines; and employed either qualitative or quantitative methods. Of a total of 248 studies screened, 33 met these criteria and included in the final sample. Risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Critical Appraisal Skills Program tools. We conducted a Synthesis Without Meta-analysis for quantitative studies and a Framework synthesis for qualitative studies.Results31 of the included studies were conducted in high-income countries, including in the US (n = 17 studies), UK (n = 10), Qatar (n = 2), Israel (n = 1) and France (n = 1). One study was in an upper middle-income country -China (n = 1) and another covered multiple countries (n = 1). 26 studies reported outcomes for ethnic minorities while 9 studies reported on migrants. Most of the studies were quantitative -cross sectional studies (n = 24) and ecological (n = 4). The remaining were qualitative (n = 4) and mixed methods (n = 1). There was consistent evidence of elevated levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Black/Afro-Caribbean groups in the US and UK, while studies of Hispanic/Latino populations in the US and Asian populations in the UK provided mixed pictures, with levels higher, lower, or the same as their White counterparts. Asians in the US had the highest COVID-19 vaccine acceptance compared to other ethnic groups. There was higher vaccine acceptance among migrant groups in Qatar and China than in the general population. However, migrants to the UK experienced barriers to vaccine access, mainly attributed to language and communication issues. Lack of confidence, mainly due to mistrust of government and health systems coupled with poor communication were the main barriers to uptake among Black ethnic minorities and migrants.ConclusionsOur study found that low confidence in COVID-19 vaccines among Black ethnic minorities driven by mistrust and safety concerns led to high vaccine hesitancy in this group. Such vaccine hesitancy rates constitute a major barrier to COVID-19 vaccine uptake among this ethnic minority. For migrants, convenience factors such as language barriers, fear of deportation and reduced physical access reduced access to COVID-19 vaccines. Building trust, reducing physical barriers and improving communication and transparency about vaccine development through healthcare workers, religious and community leaders can improve access and facilitate uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among ethnic minority and migrant communities.

Dataset Information

Barriers and facilitators associated with steps of the HIV care cascade for migrants in OECD countries: a systematic mixed studies review protocol.

Publications

Barriers and facilitators associated with steps of the HIV care cascade for migrants in OECD countries: a systematic mixed studies review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets