Patient, family and carer experiences of nutritional screening: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Despite recommendations for nutritional risk screening of all inpatients, outpatients and care home residents, as well as work to assess clinician's experiences and the validity of tools, little attention has been paid to the experiences of patients undergoing nutritional screening. This review aims to synthesise systematically the current evidence regarding nutritional risk screening with respect to the experiences and views of patients, their families and carers.Methods
A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science and British Nursing Database (inception - July 2019); with screening terms related to malnutrition, screening tools and experience. Titles, abstracts and full-text papers were independently reviewed by two reviewers and then quality-appraised. Qualitative papers and quantitative surveys were included. A narrative review of surveys and a thematic framework synthesis of interviews were used to identify themes.Results
Nine studies, including five qualitative interview papers, were included. Qualitative and quantitative study results were combined using a matrix chart to allow comparison. Surveyed participants reported processes of nutritional screening as acceptable. Three key themes emerged from qualitative data: (i) experience of nutritional screening; (ii) misunderstanding of malnutrition: of causes, role of screening and poor self-perception of risk; and (iii) barriers to and opportunities for change.Conclusions
Although the screening process is acceptable, patients' misunderstanding and poor knowledge regarding causes and consequences of malnutrition result in reduced risk perception and disbelief or disregard of nutritional screening results. Findings should inform policy and clinical practice, as well as highlight the known paucity of data regarding the effectiveness of screening on clinical outcomes.
SUBMITTER: Bullock AF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8246934 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundEarly diagnosis and intervention for people with dementia is increasingly considered a priority, but practitioners are concerned with the effects of earlier diagnosis and interventions on patients and caregivers. This systematic review evaluates the qualitative evidence about how people accommodate and adapt to the diagnosis of dementia and its immediate consequences, to guide practice.Methods and findingsWe systematically reviewed qualitative studies exploring experiences of community-dwelling individuals with dementia, and their carers, around diagnosis and the transition to becoming a person with dementia. We searched PubMed, PsychINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and the British Nursing Index (all searched in May 2010 with no date restrictions; PubMed search updated in February 2012), checked reference lists, and undertook citation searches in PubMed and Google Scholar (ongoing to September 2011). We used thematic synthesis to identify key themes, commonalities, barriers to earlier diagnosis, and support identified as helpful. We identified 126 papers reporting 102 studies including a total of 3,095 participants. Three overarching themes emerged from our analysis: (1) pathways through diagnosis, including its impact on identity, roles, and relationships; (2) resolving conflicts to accommodate a diagnosis, including the acceptability of support, focusing on the present or the future, and the use or avoidance of knowledge; and (3) strategies and support to minimise the impact of dementia. Consistent barriers to diagnosis include stigma, normalisation of symptoms, and lack of knowledge. Studies report a lack of specialist support particularly post-diagnosis.ConclusionsThere is an extensive body of qualitative literature on the experiences of community-dwelling individuals with dementia on receiving and adapting to a diagnosis of dementia. We present a thematic analysis that could be useful to professionals working with people with dementia. We suggest that research emphasis should shift towards the development and evaluation of interventions, particularly those providing support after diagnosis.
| S-EPMC3484131 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe negative impact of caregiving on carers' physical and psychological wellbeing is well documented. Carers of mental health inpatients have particularly negative experiences and largely report being dissatisfied with how they and their loved one are treated during inpatient care. It remains unclear why, despite policies intended to improve inpatient experiences. A comprehensive review of carers' inpatient experiences is needed to understand carer needs. As such, we aimed to conduct a systematic review and thematic synthesis of carer experiences of inpatient mental health care.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL for qualitative studies examining carer experiences of mental health inpatient care. Searches were supplemented by reference list screening and forward citation tracking of included studies. Results were synthesised using thematic synthesis. Our protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020197904) and our review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.FindingsTwelve studies were included from 6 countries. Four themes were identified: the emotional journey of inpatient care; invisible experts; carer concerns about quality of care for their loved one; and relationships and partnership between carers, service users and staff.InterpretationGreater attention should be paid to ensure carers are well-supported, well-informed, and included in care. More emphasis must be placed on fostering positive relationships between carers, service users and staff and in facilitating continuity of care across inpatient and community services to provide carers with a sense of security and predictability. Further research is needed to explore differences in experiences based on carer and service user characteristics and global context, alongside co-production with carers to develop and evaluate future guidelines and policies.
| S-EPMC9121622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextAdverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with increased risk of poor mental health outcomes. Although there is interest in screening for ACEs for early identification and intervention, it is not known whether screening improves outcomes for children.ObjectiveTo systematically review whether screening for ACEs in children leads to an increase in (1) identification of ACEs, (2) referrals to services, (3) increased uptake of services, and (4) improved mental health outcomes for children and parents.Data sourcesOvid Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Center for Clinical and Translational Research electronic databases were searched between 2009 and 2021.Study selectionStudies were included if researchers screened for current ACEs in children aged 0 to 12 years and they had a control comparison.Data extractionInformation was extracted, including study characteristics, sample demographics, screening tool characteristics, referral rates to services, uptake rates, and mental health outcomes.ResultsA total of 5816 articles were screened, with 4 articles meeting inclusion criteria. Screening for ACEs increases identification of adversity and may increase referrals to services. There are limited data about whether this leads to an increase in referral uptake by families. There are no reported data addressing mental health outcomes.LimitationsThere are few published control trials of moderate quality.ConclusionsThere is limited evidence that screening for ACEs improves identification of childhood adversity and may improve referrals. If we are to realize the hypothesized benefits of ACEs screening on child and parent mental health, it is essential to understand the barriers for families taking up referrals.
| S-EPMC9677935 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo understand the reasons behind, and experience of, seeking and receiving emergency ambulance treatment for a 'primary care sensitive' condition.DesignA comprehensive, qualitative systematic review. Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, Health Management Information Systems, Healthcare Management Information Consortium, OpenSigle, EThOS and Digital Archive of Research Theses databases were systematically searched for studies exploring patient, carer or healthcare professional interactions with ambulance services for 'primary care sensitive' problems. Studies using wholly qualitative approaches or mixed-methods studies with substantial use of qualitative techniques in both the methods and analysis sections were included. An analytical thematic synthesis was undertaken, using a line-by-line qualitative coding method and a hierarchical inductive approach.ResultsOf 1458 initial results, 33 studies met the first level (relevance) inclusion criteria, and six studies met the second level (methodology and quality) criteria. The analysis suggests that patients define situations worthy of 'emergency' ambulance use according to complex socioemotional factors, as well as experienced physical symptoms. There can be a mismatch between how patients and professionals define 'emergency' situations. Deciding to call an ambulance is a process shaped by practical considerations and a strong emotional component, which can be influenced by the views of caregivers. Sometimes the value of a contact with the ambulance service is principally in managing this emotional component. Patients often wish to hand over responsibility for decisions when experiencing a perceived emergency. Feeling empowered to take control of a situation is a highly valued aspect of ambulance care.ConclusionsWhen responding to a request for 'emergency' help for a low-acuity condition, urgent-care services need to be sensitive to how the patient's emotional and practical perception of the situation may have shaped their decision-making and the influence that carers may have had on the process. There may be novel ways to deliver some of the valued aspects of urgent care, more geared to the resource-limited environment.
| S-EPMC5623409 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, robotic rehabilitation devices have often been used for motor training. However, to date, no systematic reviews of qualitative studies exploring the end-user experiences of robotic devices in motor rehabilitation have been published. The aim of this study was to review end-users' (patients, carers and healthcare professionals) experiences with robotic devices in motor rehabilitation, by conducting a systematic review and thematic meta-synthesis of qualitative studies concerning the users' experiences with such robotic devices.MethodsQualitative studies and mixed-methods studies with a qualitative element were eligible for inclusion. Nine electronic databases were searched from inception to August 2020, supplemented with internet searches and forward and backward citation tracking from the included studies and review articles. Data were synthesised thematically following the Thomas and Harden approach. The CASP Qualitative Checklist was used to assess the quality of the included studies of this review.ResultsThe search strategy identified a total of 13,556 citations and after removing duplicates and excluding citations based on title and abstract, and full text screening, 30 studies were included. All studies were considered of acceptable quality. We developed six analytical themes: logistic barriers; technological challenges; appeal and engagement; supportive interactions and relationships; benefits for physical, psychological, and social function(ing); and expanding and sustaining therapeutic options.ConclusionsDespite experiencing technological and logistic challenges, participants found robotic devices acceptable, useful and beneficial (physically, psychologically, and socially), as well as fun and interesting. Having supportive relationships with significant others and positive therapeutic relationships with healthcare staff were considered the foundation for successful rehabilitation and recovery.
| S-EPMC8710022 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHospice-at-home aims to enable patients approaching end-of-life to die at home and support their carers. A wide range of different service models exists but synthesised evidence on how best to support family carers to provide sustainable end-of-life care at home is limited.AimTo explore what works best to promote family carers' experiences of hospice-at-home.DesignRealist evaluation with mixed methods. This paper focuses on qualitative interviews with carers (to gain their perspective and as proxy for patients) and service providers from 12 case study sites in England. Interviews were coded and programme theories were refined by the research team including two public members.Setting/participantsInterviews with carers (involved daily) of patients admitted to hospice-at-home services (n = 58) and hospice-at-home staff (n = 78).ResultsPost bereavement, 76.4% of carers thought that they had received as much help and support as they needed and most carers (75.8%) rated the help and support as excellent or outstanding. Of six final programme theories capturing key factors relevant to providing optimum services, those directly relevant to carer experiences were: integration and co-ordination of services; knowledge, skills and ethos of hospice staff; volunteer roles; support directed at the patient-carer dyad.ConclusionsCarers in hospice-at-home services identified care to be of a higher quality than generic community services. Hospice staff were perceived as having 'time to care', communicated well and were comfortable with dying and death. Hands-on care was particularly valued in the period close to death.
| S-EPMC10657508 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high risk of malnutrition, primarily in older people; assessing nutritional risk using appropriate screening tools is critical. This systematic review identified applicable tools and assessed their measurement properties. Literature was searched in the MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases. Four studies conducted in China met the eligibility criteria. Sample sizes ranged from six to 182, and participants' ages from 65 to 87 years. Seven nutritional screening and assessment tools were used: the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), the MNA-short form (MNA-sf), the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), the Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), the Geriatric NRI (GNRI), and modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score. Nutritional risk was identified in 27.5% to 100% of participants. The NRS-2002, MNA, MNA-sf, NRI, and MUST demonstrated high sensitivity; the MUST had better specificity. The MNA and MUST demonstrated better criterion validity. The MNA-sf demonstrated better predictive validity for poor appetite and weight loss; the NRS-2002 demonstrated better predictive validity for prolonged hospitalization. mNUTRIC score demonstrated good predictive validity for hospital mortality. Most instruments demonstrate high sensitivity for identifying nutritional risk, but none are acknowledged as the best for nutritional screening in older adults with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7599513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo report on direct experiences from advanced head and neck cancer patients, family carers and healthcare professionals, and the barriers to integrating specialist palliative care.MethodsUsing a naturalistic, interpretative approach, within Northwest England, a purposive sample of adult head and neck cancer patients was selected. Their family carers were invited to participate. Healthcare professionals (representing head and neck surgery and specialist nursing; oncology; specialist palliative care; general practice and community nursing) were recruited. All participants underwent face-to-face or telephone interviews. A thematic approach, using a modified version of Colazzi's framework, was used to analyze the data.ResultsSeventeen interviews were conducted (9 patients, 4 joint with family carers and 8 healthcare professionals). Two main barriers were identified by healthcare professionals: "lack of consensus about timing of Specialist Palliative Care engagement" and "high stake decisions with uncertainty about treatment outcome." The main barrier identified by patients and family carers was "lack of preparedness when transitioning from curable to incurable disease." There were 2 overlapping themes from both groups: "uncertainty about meeting psychological needs" and "misconceptions of palliative care."ConclusionsHead and neck cancer has a less predictable disease trajectory, where complex decisions are made and treatment outcomes are less certain. Specific focus is needed to define the optimal way to initiate Specialist Palliative Care referrals which may differ from those used for the wider cancer population. Clearer ways to effectively communicate goals of care are required potentially involving collaboration between Specialist Palliative Care and the wider head and neck cancer team.
| S-EPMC7961626 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or intersex (LGBTQI) people with cancer and their carers report poorer psychological outcomes than the general non-LGBTQI cancer population. There is growing acknowledgement that these health inequities can be explained by minority stress, which can be buffered by social support.Study aimTo examine subjective experiences of minority stress and social support for LGBTQI people with cancer and their carers, drawing on qualitative findings from the Out with Cancer study.MethodAn online survey including open ended items was completed by 430 LGBTQI cancer patients and 132 partners and other carers, representing a range of tumor types, sexual and gender identities, age and intersex status. A sub-sample of 104 patients and 31 carers completed an interview, with a follow-up photovoice activity and second interview completed by 45 patients and 10 carers. Data was thematically analysed using an intersectional theoretical framework.ResultsHistorical and present-day experiences of discrimination, violence, family rejection and exclusion created a legacy of distress and fear. This impacted on trust of healthcare professionals and contributed to distress and unmet needs in cancer survivorship and care. Social support, often provided by partners and other chosen family, including intimate partners and other LGBTQI people, buffered the negative impacts of minority stress, helping LGBTQI patients deal with cancer. However, some participants lacked support due to not having a partner, rejection from family of origin and lack of support within LGBTQI communities, increasing vulnerability to poor psychological wellbeing. Despite the chronic, cumulative impacts of minority stress, LGBTQI patients and carers were not passive recipients of discriminatory and exclusion in cancer care, demonstrating agency and resistance through collective action and advocacy.ConclusionLGBTQI people have unique socio-political histories and present-day psycho-social experiences that contribute to distress during cancer. Social support serves to buffer and ameliorate this distress. There is a need for cancer healthcare professionals and support services to be aware of and responsive to these potential vulnerabilities, including the intersectional differences in experiences of minority stress and social support. There is also a need for recognition and facilitation of social support among LGBTQI people with cancer and their carers.
| S-EPMC9263127 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Healthcare services are facing extensive challenges due to the increased proportion of elderly persons and persons with chronic disease. Technology enabled care (TEC) is a collective term for telecare, telehealth, telemedicine, mobile (m)-, digital- and electronic (e) health services. TEC is increasingly seen as a solution to many of the challenges facing the health sector. Patient perspectives may provide a useful evaluation tool for new healthcare technologies that have limited clinical data to support their effectiveness. More studies need to be done to better understand the acceptance of technology in healthcare. This review aim to summarize empirical studies exploring patient experiences with TEC. Findings in this study can be used to better understand what is needed to develop, implement and improve such services. METHODS:Systematic searches were conducted in the Pubmed, Psycinfo, Cinahl, Embase, Cochrane systematic reviews and Cochrane clinical trials databases. These studies were systematically reviewed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, subjected to quality appraisals using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP), and synthesized via integrative analysis. RESULTS:After removal of duplicates, languages other than English, and non-scientific records, 4087 titles and abstracts were screened. After assessment against inclusion and exclusion criteria, 69 records were screened in full-text, and underwent quality appraisal. 21 records were included in the integrative analysis. Patients' experiences with TEC related to 1) technological features, namely functionality and appearance, and 2) evolving independence, namely empowerment, autonomy and security. Technological challenges lead to frustrations and negative experiences, while a stigmatizing appearance lead to patients not using the solution. Through the use of TECs, patients felt more empowered, learning about their condition, increasing awareness to their symptoms and treatment, and feeling more safe and self-efficient. Patient participation was seen as a central aspect of the development of the TECT, as well as when using it. CONCLUSION:This review deepens the understanding of patients' experiences with technology enabled care solutions. Patients' experiences not only relate to the practical/technical element of the device or solution, but to how this impact on their everyday life. Patient participation in development and planned use of such solutions should be considered an integral part in healthcare quality initiatives.
| S-EPMC7446109 | biostudies-literature