Mapping Research Conducted on Long-Term Care Facilities for Older People in Brazil: A Scoping Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wachholz PA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7915754 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Mapping Research Conducted on Long-Term Care Facilities for Older People in Brazil: A Scoping Review.
Wachholz Patrick Alexander PA De Oliveira Deborah Cristina DC Hinsliff-Smith Kathryn K Devi Reena R Villas Boas Paulo José Fortes PJF Shepherd Victoria V Jacinto Alessandro Ferrari AF Watanabe Helena Akemi Wada HAW Gordon Adam Lee AL Ricci Natalia Aquaroni NA
International journal of environmental research and public health 20210205 4
This scoping review aimed to explore the characteristics, strengths, and gaps in research conducted in Brazilian long-term care facilities (LTCFs) for older adults. Electronic searches investigating the residents (≥60 years old), their families, and the LTCF workforce in Brazil were conducted in Medline, EMBASE, LILACS, and Google Scholar, within the timescale of 1999 to 2018, limited to English, Portuguese, or Spanish. The reference lists were hand searched for additional papers. The Mixed Meth ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:This paper reports a scoping review of the literature on eating difficulties among older adults with dementia in long-term care facilities to identify key concepts, methods of measuring outcomes, interventions, and related factors. A scoping review was performed using the bibliographic databases PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library. A combination of keywords and subject headings related to eating or feeding difficulties was used. Inclusion criteria were limited to materials published in English. A total of 1070 references were retrieved, of which 39 articles were selected after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Articles that met the criteria were published between 1987 and 2020. "Eating disabilities" have been defined as problems related to choosing food and/or the ability to get food to one's mouth, chew, and swallow. Interventions for eating difficulties described in the literature include spaced retrieval training, Montessori training, and feeding skill training. Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and environmental factors related to eating difficulties were identified. This scoping review will provide direct care workers, nursing educators, and administrators with an overview of eating performance and a broad understanding of eating difficulties for older adults with dementia in long-term care facilities.
| S-EPMC8508293 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe global COVID-19 pandemic produced large-scale health and economic complications. Older people and those with comorbidities are particularly vulnerable to this virus, with nursing homes and long term care facilities (LTCF) experiencing significant morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 outbreaks. The aim of this rapid systematic review was to investigate measures implemented in LTCF to reduce transmission of COVID-19 and their effect on morbidity and mortality of residents, staff and visitors.SettingLong-term care facilities.ParticipantsResidents, staff and visitors of facilities.Primary and secondary outcome measuresDatabases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Databases and repositories and MedRXiv prepublished database) were systematically searched from inception to 27 July 2020 to identify studies reporting assessment of interventions to reduce transmission of COVID-19 in nursing homes among residents, staff or visitors. Outcome measures include facility characteristics, morbidity data, case fatalities and transmission rates. Due to study quality and heterogeneity, no meta-analysis was conducted.ResultsThe search yielded 1414 articles, with 38 studies included. Reported interventions include mass testing, use of personal protective equipment, symptom screening, visitor restrictions, hand hygiene and droplet/contact precautions, and resident cohorting. Prevalence rates ranged from 1.2% to 85.4% in residents and 0.6% to 62.6% in staff. Mortality rates ranged from 5.3% to 55.3% in residents.ConclusionsNovel evidence in this review details the impact of facility size, availability of staff and practices of operating between multiple facilities, and for-profit status of facilities as factors contributing to the size and number of COVID-19 outbreaks. No causative relationships can be determined; however, this review provides evidence of interventions that reduce transmission of COVID-19 in LTCF.Prospero registration numberCRD42020191569.
| S-EPMC8523961 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThere is a growing demand for long-term care services for older adults that embrace a model of care centred on individual recipients of care. In long-term care, models of person, resident and relationship-centred care have been developed and implemented to promote independence, decision making and choices of residents. Although the concepts of centredness have been readily adopted in these environments, what constitutes centredness is often vague and lacks conceptual clarity and definition. The research questions guiding this scoping review are: (1) What are the defining attributes, conceptual boundaries and theoretical underpinnings of each centredness term in long-term care? (2) For what purposes have centredness directed models of care been used in this context? (3) What types of study designs have been used to examine centredness in this context? (4) What outcomes related to centredness have been reported or evaluated and how were they measured in long-term care?Methods and analysisThis review uses the methodological framework for conducting a scoping review by Arksey and O'Malley. The search strategy will be applied to nine bibliographic and citation databases, Google Scholar and the grey literature. Study selection will occur in a two-step process. First, the titles and abstracts of all search results will be screened by individual reviewers. Second, a full-text review will be conducted by a pair of reviewers. To be included articles must (1) define centredness in the context of long-term care; (2) describe the defining features of centredness; (3) explore the theoretical underpinnings of centredness; (4) outline outcomes of centredness or (5) use outcome measures related to centredness. Data will be extracted from included studies and analysed using thematic analysis as described by Braun and Clark.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. Dissemination strategies will follow a targeted and tailored approach based on study findings.
| S-EPMC6089323 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this review is to describe the challenges and barriers to conducting research in long-term care facilities.MethodsA literature search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO and CINAHL. Keywords used included "long term care", "nursing home", "research", "trial", "challenge" and "barrier", etc. Resulting references were screened in order to identify relevant studies that reported on challenges derived from first-hand experience of empirical research studies. Challenges were summarized and synthesized.ResultsOf 1723 references, 39 articles were selected for inclusion. To facilitate understanding we proposed a classification framework of 8 main themes to categorize the research challenges presented in the 39 studies, relating to the characteristics of facility/owner/administrator, resident, staff caregiver, family caregiver, investigator, ethical or legal concerns, methodology, and budgetary considerations.ConclusionsConducting research in long-term care facilities is full of challenges which can be categorized into 8 main themes. Investigators should be aware of all these challenges and specifically address them when planning their studies. Stakeholders should be involved from an early stage and flexibility should be built into both the methodology and research budget.
| S-EPMC6186062 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to synthesize the findings of qualitative studies investigating the factors influencing antibiotic prescribing in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). These findings will inform the development of future antimicrobial stewardship strategies (AMS) in this setting.MethodsWe searched Embase, PubMed, PsycInfo, Social Science Citations Index and Google Scholar for all qualitative studies investigating health care professionals' views on antibiotic prescribing in LTCFs. The quality of the papers was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) assessment tool for qualitative research. Thematic synthesis was used to integrate the emergent themes into an overall analytical theme.ResultsThe synthesis of eight qualitative studies indicated that health care professionals and administrators have identified factors that influence antibiotic prescribing in LTCFs. These factors include variations in knowledge and practice among health care professionals, and the LTCF context, which is unique given the complex patient population and restricted access to doctors and diagnostic tests. The social factors underpinning the interaction between nurses, residents' families and doctors also influence decision making around antibiotic prescribing. The study also found that there is an acknowledged need for collaborative, evidence-based AMS specific to LTCFs, as antibiotic prescribing is heavily influenced by factors unique to this setting.ConclusionThis review highlighted the key contextual challenges for AMS in LTCFs. The findings provide an in-depth insight into the factors--such as the LTCF context, social factors, variability in knowledge and prescribing practices, and antimicrobial resistance--that impact on antibiotic prescribing and AMS strategies. These factors must be considered in order to ensure the feasibility and applicability of future AMS interventions.
| S-EPMC4412731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite clear evidence of benefits in acute-care hospitals, controversy over the effectiveness of IPC measures for MDROs is perceptible and evidence-based practice has not been established.ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of IPC interventions on MDRO colonization and infections in LTCFs.Data sourcesOvid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL from inception to September 2020.Eligibility criteriaOriginal and peer-reviewed articles examining the post-intervention effects on MDRO colonization and infections in LTCFs.Interventions(i) Horizontal interventions: administrative engagement, barrier precautions, education, environmental cleaning, hand hygiene, performance improvement, and source control; and (ii) vertical intervention: active surveillance plus decolonization.Study appraisal and synthesisWe employed a random-effects meta-analysis to estimate the pooled risk ratios (pRRs) for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization by intervention duration; and conducted subgroup analyses on different intervention components. Study quality was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tools.ResultsOf 3877 studies identified, 19 were eligible for inclusion (eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs)). Studies reported outcomes associated with MRSA (15 studies), vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE) (four studies), Clostridium difficile (two studies), and Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) (two studies). Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pRRs were close to unity regardless of intervention duration (long: RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.60-1.10]; medium: RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.25-2.68]; short: RR 0.95 [95% CI 0.53-1.69]). Vertical interventions in studies with a small sample size showed significant reductions in MRSA colonization while horizontal interventions did not. All studies involving active administrative engagement reported reductions. The risk of bias was high in all but two studies.ConclusionsOur meta-analysis did not show any beneficial effects from IPC interventions on MRSA reductions in LTCFs. Our findings highlight that the effectiveness of interventions in these facilities is likely conditional on resource availability-particularly decolonization and barrier precautions, due to their potential adverse events and uncertain effectiveness. Hence, administrative engagement is crucial for all effective IPC programmes. LTCFs should consider a pragmatic approach to reinforce standard precautions as routine practice and implement barrier precautions and decolonization to outbreak responses only.
| S-EPMC8761316 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionScientists from a wide variety of fields of knowledge are increasingly interested in climate change issues. The importance given to the phenomenon is explained by the uncertainties surrounding it and its consequences not yet fully known. However, there is wide agreement that human activities are modifying the Earth's climate beyond the natural cyclical changes and that these changes impact human health. This scoping review aimed to understand how research on the links between climate change and human health in urban areas is conducted and how this research is approached holistically or not.Methods and analysisThis scoping review is mainly guided by the Arskey and O'Malley scoping review framework. A broad range of databases will be used, including PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science Core Collection, GreenFILE and Information Science & Technology Abstracts. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria will be used, with a focus on climate change and human health outcome studies published between January 1990 and July 2019. An interdisciplinary team has formulated search strategies and the reviewers will independently screen eligible studies for final study selection. We will apply a thematic analysis to evaluate and categorise the study findings. We expect to map the research according to the scientific research methods, the scientific fields and the determinants of health studied. Along these lines, we will be able to understand how holistic the research is.Ethics and disseminationNo primary data will be collected since all data presented in this review are based on published articles and publicly available documents. Therefore, ethics committee approval is not a requirement. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, presentations at conferences relevant to the field of this research, as well as presentations to relevant stakeholders.
| S-EPMC7523206 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe acute nature of COVID-19 and its effects on society in terms of social distancing and quarantine regulations affect the provision of palliative care for people with dementia who live in long-term care facilities. The current COVID-19 pandemic poses a challenge to nursing staff, who are in a key position to provide high-quality palliative care for people with dementia and their families.ObjectiveTo formulate practice recommendations for nursing staff with regard to providing palliative dementia care in times of COVID-19.Design and methodA rapid scoping review following guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Eligible papers focused on COVID-19 in combination with palliative care for older people or people with dementia and informed practical nursing recommendations for long-term care facilities. After data extraction, we formulated recommendations covering essential domains in palliative care adapted from the National Consensus Project's Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care.Data sourcesWe searched the bibliographic databases of PubMed, CINAHL and PsycINFO for academic publications. We searched for grey literature using the search engine Google. Moreover, we included relevant letters and editorials, guidelines, web articles and policy papers published by knowledge and professional institutes or associations in dementia and palliative care.ResultsIn total, 23 documents (7 (special) articles in peer-reviewed journals, 6 guides, 4 letters to editors, 2 web articles (blogs), 2 reports, a correspondence paper and a position paper) were included. The highest number of papers informed recommendations under the domains 'advance care planning' and 'psychological aspects of care'. The lowest number of papers informed the domains 'ethical care', 'care of the dying', 'spiritual care' and 'bereavement care'. We found no papers that informed the 'cultural aspects of care' domain.ConclusionLiterature that focuses specifically on palliative care for people with dementia in long-term care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic is still largely lacking. Particular challenges that need addressing involve care of the dying and the bereaved, and ethical, cultural and spiritual aspects of care. Moreover, we must acknowledge grief and moral distress among nursing staff. Nursing leadership is needed to safeguard the quality of care and nursing staff should work together within an interprofessional care team to initiate advance care planning conversations in a timely manner, to review and document advance care plans, and to adapt goals of care as they may change due to the COVID-19 situation. Tweetable abstract: The current COVID-19 pandemic affects people living with dementia, their families and their professional caregivers. This rapid scoping review searched for academic and grey literature to formulate practical recommendations for nursing staff working in long-term care facilities on how to provide palliative care for people with dementia in times of COVID-19. There is a particular need for grief and bereavement support and we must acknowledge grief and moral distress among nursing staff. This review exposes practice and knowledge gaps in the response to COVID-19 that reflect the longstanding neglect and weaknesses of palliative care in the long-term care sector. Nursing leadership is needed to safeguard the quality of palliative care, interprofessional collaboration and peer support among nursing staff.
| S-EPMC7526658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo map in the current literature instruments for the assessment and stratification of frailty in community-dwelling older people, as well as to analyse them from the perspective of the Brazilian context.DesignScoping review.Study selectionThe selection of studies took place between March and April 2020. Includes electronic databases: Medline, Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences, Scopus, Web of Science and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Literature Health Alliance, in addition to searching grey literature.Data extractionA data extraction spreadsheet was created to collect the main information from the studies involved, from the title to the type of assessment and stratification of frailty.ResultsIn summary, 17 frailty assessment and stratification instruments applicable to community-dwelling older people were identified. Among these, the frailty phenotype of Fried et al was the instrument most present in the studies (45.5%). The physical domain was present in all the instruments analysed, while the social, psychological and environmental domains were present in only 10 instruments.ConclusionsThis review serves as a guideline for primary healthcare professionals, showing 17 instruments applicable to the context of the community-dwelling older people, pointing out advantages and disadvantages that influence the decision of the instrument to be used. Furthermore, this scoping review was a guide for further studies carried out by the same authors, which aim to compare instruments.
| S-EPMC8704957 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cluster randomized trial design, where groups of participants are randomized instead of individual participants, is increasingly being used in long-term care research. The purpose of this review was to determine the characteristics of cluster randomized trials in long-term care facilities. A medical librarian conducted the literature search. Two independent reviewers reviewed each paper. Studies were included if the design was cluster randomized and participants were from long-term care facilities. For each included study, two independent data extractors captured data on study attributes, including: journal, location, year published, author discipline, funding, methodology, number of participants, and intervention target. The literature search yielded 7,679 unique studies, with 195 studies meeting the selection criteria and being included for data extraction. The included studies were published between 1976 and 2017, with 53% of studies published after 2009. The term cluster randomized was in the title of only 45% of the studies. The studies were conducted worldwide; the United States had the largest number of studies (23%), followed by the United Kingdom (18%). Ten percent of studies were published in journals with an impact factor >10. The most frequent discipline of the first and last authors was medicine (34%), followed by nursing (17%). Forty-nine percent of the studies had government funding, while only 20% had medical industry funding. In studies with <1000 residents, 85% of the studies obtained consent from the resident and/or their proxy, while in studies with ? 1000 residents, it was 31%. The most frequent intervention targets were infection (13%), falls/fracture (13%), and behavior/physical restraint (13%). Cluster randomized controlled trials in long-term care have a unique set of characteristics. Results of this review will provide guidance to researchers conducting studies in long-term care facilities.
| S-EPMC7204357 | biostudies-literature