Interventions to Improve Post-Detoxification Treatment Engagement and Alcohol Recovery: Systematic Review of Intervention Types and Effectiveness

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Livingston ◽  
Victoria Ameral ◽  
Elise Hocking ◽  
Xenia Leviyah ◽  
Christine Timko
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Treatment Engagement ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Intervention Development ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Mutual Help ◽  
Alcohol Detoxification ◽  
Alcohol Recovery

Abstract Aims Most inpatient alcohol detoxification patients do not seek treatment post-discharge, which increases the risk of relapse and re-hospitalization. To date, there have been no efforts to synthesize the evidence supporting the broad range of available interventions for this critical transition. The current study is a systematic review and evaluation of interventions designed to promote treatment engagement and recovery following alcohol detoxification. Methods The initial literature search yielded 6419 articles, published since 1999, from PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collection and PsycARTICLES databases, 49 of which were eligible for full review. Data extraction included in-depth evaluation of intervention types, study and research design features, reported outcomes and study quality/bias indicators. All articles were coded by independent raters and final results were obtained through consensus. Results Interventions included medical/medication, psychological/psychosocial, technological, mutual-help and combined approaches. On average, medical/medication interventions were less, and psychological/psychosocial and technological interventions were more likely to demonstrate efficacy with respect to treatment engagement and recovery. There was significant variability in study quality/bias but no significant differences across intervention types. Studies differed considerably across measured outcomes, internal and external validity, in/exclusion criteria and documentation of co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Conclusion Over half of studies reviewed reported empirical support for the intervention(s) evaluated. Although findings slightly favor non-medical interventions, the variability in study design and quality/bias requires more rigorous follow-up research. Recommendations from this review may guide future implementation and intervention development, which are critically needed to improve post-detoxification care and outcomes for patients with alcohol use disorder.

scholarly journals Prevalence and predictors of medication non-adherence among patients with multimorbidity: A systematic review protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 29
Author(s):  
Louise Foley ◽  
James Larkin ◽  
Richard Lombard-Vance ◽  
Andrew W. Murphy ◽  
Gerard J. Molloy
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intervention Development ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Form Quality

Introduction: Patients with multimorbidity are expected to adhere to complex medication regimens in order to manage their multiple chronic conditions. It has been reported the likelihood of adherence decreases as patients are prescribed more medications. Much medication adherence research to date is dominated by a single-disease focus, which is at odds with the rising prevalence of multimorbidity and may artificially underestimate the complexity of managing chronic illness. This review aims to describe the prevalence of medication non-adherence among patients with multimorbidity, and to identify potential predictors of non-adherence in this population. Methods: A systematic review will be conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO will be searched using a predefined search strategy from 2009–2019. Quantitative studies will be considered eligible for review if prevalence of medication non-adherence among adults with two or more chronic conditions is reported. Studies will be included in the review if available in English full text. Titles and abstracts will be screened by single review, with 20% of screening cross-checked by a second reviewer. Full-text articles will be screened by two independent reviewers, noting reasons for exclusions. Data extraction will be performed using a predefined extraction form. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted using criteria for observational studies outlined by Sanderson et al. (2007). A narrative synthesis and, if feasible, meta-analysis will be conducted. Discussion: By exploring medication non-adherence from a multimorbidity perspective, the review aims to inform an evidence base for intervention development which accounts for the rising prevalence of patients with multiple chronic conditions.  Study registration: The systematic review is prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019133849); registered on 12 June 2019.

scholarly journals Prevalence and predictors of medication non-adherence among patients with multimorbidity: A systematic review protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 29
Author(s):  
Louise Foley ◽  
James Larkin ◽  
Richard Lombard-Vance ◽  
Andrew W. Murphy ◽  
Gerard J. Molloy
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intervention Development ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Form Quality

Introduction: Patients with multimorbidity are expected to adhere to complex medication regimens in order to manage their multiple chronic conditions. It has been reported the likelihood of adherence decreases as patients are prescribed more medications. Much medication adherence research to date is dominated by a single-disease focus, which is at odds with the rising prevalence of multimorbidity and may artificially underestimate the complexity of managing chronic illness. This review aims to describe the prevalence of medication non-adherence among patients with multimorbidity, and to identify potential predictors of non-adherence in this population. Methods: A systematic review will be conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO will be searched using a predefined search strategy from 2009–2019. Quantitative studies will be considered eligible for review if prevalence of medication non-adherence among adults with two or more chronic conditions is reported. Studies will be included in the review if available in English full text. Titles and abstracts will be screened by single review, with 20% of screening cross-checked by a second reviewer. Full-text articles will be screened by two independent reviewers, noting reasons for exclusions. Data extraction will be performed using a predefined extraction form. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted using criteria for observational studies outlined by Sanderson et al. (2007). A narrative synthesis and, if feasible, meta-analysis will be conducted. Discussion: By exploring medication non-adherence from a multimorbidity perspective, the review aims to inform an evidence base for intervention development which accounts for the rising prevalence of patients with multiple chronic conditions.  Study registration: The systematic review is prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019133849); registered on 12 June 2019.

scholarly journals Evidence Map and Systematic Review of Disinfection Efficacy on Environmental Surfaces in Healthcare Facilities

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (21) ◽  
pp. 11100
Author(s):  
Elizabeth C. Christenson ◽  
Ryan Cronk ◽  
Helen Atkinson ◽  
Aayush Bhatt ◽  
Emilio Berdiel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Laboratory Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
System Level ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Evidence Map ◽  
Healthcare Facilities ◽  
Environmental Surfaces

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) contribute to patient morbidity and mortality with an estimated 1.7 million infections and 99,000 deaths costing USD $28–34 billion annually in the United States alone. There is little understanding as to if current environmental surface disinfection practices reduce pathogen load, and subsequently HAIs, in critical care settings. This evidence map includes a systematic review on the efficacy of disinfecting environmental surfaces in healthcare facilities. We screened 17,064 abstracts, 635 full texts, and included 181 articles for data extraction and study quality assessment. We reviewed ten disinfectant types and compared disinfectants with respect to study design, outcome organism, and fourteen indictors of study quality. We found important areas for improvement and gaps in the research related to study design, implementation, and analysis. Implementation of disinfection, a determinant of disinfection outcomes, was not measured in most studies and few studies assessed fungi or viruses. Assessing and comparing disinfection efficacy was impeded by study heterogeneity; however, we catalogued the outcomes and results for each disinfection type. We concluded that guidelines for disinfectant use are primarily based on laboratory data rather than a systematic review of in situ disinfection efficacy. It is critically important for practitioners and researchers to consider system-level efficacy and not just the efficacy of the disinfectant.

scholarly journals Translating Knowledge in Rehabilitation: Systematic Review

2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 663-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Allyson Jones ◽  
Sanjesh C. Roop ◽  
Sheri L. Pohar ◽  
Lauren Albrecht ◽  
Shannon D. Scott
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Intervention Development ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Audit And Feedback ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
Clear Delineation

Background Clinicians are faced with using the current best evidence to make treatment decisions, yet synthesis of knowledge translation (KT) strategies that influence professional practice behaviors in rehabilitation disciplines remains largely unknown. Purpose The purposes of this study were: (1) to examine the state of science for KT strategies used in the rehabilitation professions (physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech-language pathology), (2) to identify the methodological approaches utilized in studies exploring KT strategies, and (3) to report the extent that KT interventions are described. Data Sources Eight electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC, PASCAL, EMBASE, IPA, Scopus, and CENTRAL) were searched from January 1985 to May 2013 using language (English) restriction. Study Selection Eligibility criteria specified articles evaluating interventions or strategies with a primary purpose of translating research or enhancing research uptake into clinical practice. Data Extraction Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, performed data extraction, and performed quality assessment. The published descriptions of the KT interventions were compared with the Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research's (WIDER) Recommendations to Improve the Reporting of the Content of Behaviour Change Interventions. Data Synthesis Of a total of 2,793 articles located and titles and abstracts screened, 26 studies were included in the systematic review. Eighteen articles reported interventions that used a multicomponent KT strategy. Education-related components were the predominant KT intervention regardless of whether it was a single or multicomponent intervention. Few studies used reminders or audit and feedback intervention (n=3). Only one study's primary outcome measure was an economic evaluation. No clear delineation of the effect on KT strategies was seen. Limitations Diverse studies were included; however, the heterogeneity of the studies was not conducive to pooling the data. Conclusions The modest-to-low methodological quality assessed in the studies underscores the gaps in KT strategies used in rehabilitation and highlights the need for rigorously designed studies that are well reported.

scholarly journals Determinants of healthcare use based on the Andersen model: a study protocol for a systematic review of longitudinal studies

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e044435
Author(s):  
André Hajek ◽  
Benedikt Kretzler ◽  
Hans-Helmut König
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Longitudinal Studies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Healthcare Use ◽  
Andersen Model ◽  
Longitudinal Observational Studies

IntroductionA previous systematic review published in 2012 focused on the use of health services based on the Andersen model. Extending this review, we will exclusively focus on systematically synthesising longitudinal studies examining the determinants of healthcare use based on the Andersen model. Therefore, our aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of longitudinal observational studies investigating the predictors of healthcare use explicitly using this model.Methods and analysisWe will search three electronic databases (Medline, PsycINFO and CINAHL). Furthermore, reference lists will be searched manually. Longitudinal observational studies will be investigating the determinants of healthcare use (in terms of use of outpatient physician services (like general practitioner’s visits or specialist visits in total) and hospitalisation). We will exclude disease-specific samples. Data extraction will focus on methods (eg, assessment of healthcare use), sample characteristics and main findings. A suitable tool will be used to assess the study quality. Study selection, data extraction and evaluation of study quality will be conducted by two reviewers. The findings will be presented by means of figures, summary tables, narrative summaries and meta-analysis (if possible).Ethics and disseminationNo primary data will be collected. Therefore, approval by an ethics committee is not required. Our findings are planned to be published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020193198.

Impact of surgery timing for craniosynostosis on neurodevelopmental outcomes: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Mandela ◽  
Maggie Bellew ◽  
Paul Chumas ◽  
Hannah Nash
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Beneficial Effect ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Sociodemographic Factors ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Neurodevelopmental Outcomes ◽  
Age At Surgery ◽  
Data Extraction Form ◽  
Surgery Timing ◽  
Anesthetic Exposure

OBJECTIVEThere are currently no guidelines for the optimum age for surgical treatment of craniosynostosis. This systematic review summarizes and assesses evidence on whether there is an optimal age for surgery in terms of neurodevelopmental outcomes.METHODSThe databases MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase + Embase Classic, and Web of Science were searched between October and November 2016 and searches were repeated in July 2017. According to PICO (participants, intervention, comparison, outcome) criteria, studies were included that focused on: children diagnosed with nonsyndromic craniosynostosis, aged ≤ 5 years at time of surgery; corrective surgery for nonsyndromic craniosynostosis; comparison of age-at-surgery groups; and tests of cognitive and neurodevelopmental postoperative outcomes. Studies that did not compare age-at-surgery groups (e.g., those employing a correlational design alone) were excluded. Data were double-extracted by 2 authors using a modified version of the Cochrane data extraction form.RESULTSTen studies met the specified criteria; 5 found a beneficial effect of earlier surgery, and 5 did not. No study found a beneficial effect of later surgery. No study collected data on length of anesthetic exposure and only 1 study collected data on sociodemographic factors.CONCLUSIONSIt was difficult to draw firm conclusions from the results due to multiple confounding factors. There is some inconclusive evidence that earlier surgery is beneficial for patients with sagittal synostosis. The picture is even more mixed for other subtypes. There is no evidence that later surgery is beneficial. The authors recommend that future research use agreed-upon parameters for: age-at-surgery cut-offs, follow-up times, and outcome measures.

A Systematic Review on Barriers to Palliative Care in Oncology

2021 ◽  
pp. 104990912098328
Author(s):  
Jyotsana Parajuli ◽  
Judith E. Hupcey
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Intervention Development ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Utilization ◽  
Review Of Literature ◽  
Meta Analyses

The number of people with cancer and the need for palliative care among this population is increasing in the United States. Despite this growing need, several barriers exist to the utilization of palliative care in oncology. The purpose of this study was to synthesize the evidence on the barriers to palliative care utilization in an oncology population. A systematic review of literature was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, and Psych Info databases were used for the literature search. Articles were included if they: 1) focused on cancer, (2) examined and discussed barriers to palliative care, and c) were peer reviewed, published in English, and had an accessible full text. A total of 29 studies (8 quantitative, 18 qualitative, and 3 mixed-methods) were identified and synthesized for this review. The sample size of the included studies ranged from 10 participants to 313 participants. The barriers to palliative care were categorized into barriers related to the patient and family, b) barriers related to providers, and c) barriers related to the healthcare system or policy. The factors identified in this review provide guidance for intervention development to mitigate the existing barriers and facilitate the use palliative care in individuals with cancer.

scholarly journals Pooled estimate of vitamin D deficiency among pregnant women in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Angeline Jeyakumar ◽  
Vidhya Shinde ◽  
Reshma Ravindran
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Vitamin D ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Vitamin D Deficiency ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Care Services ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Women In India

Abstract Background Vitamin D deficiency among pregnant women is a public health concern globally. In India, individual studies report high prevalence. However, lack of national data masks the true burden. This work determined the pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among pregnant women in India through a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Methods Three different search engines yielded 15 eligible articles. Study quality was assessed by 10 different criteria and summary of study quality was categorized as per Cochrane standards. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among healthy pregnant women and heterogeneity among selected studies. A sample of n = 4088 was used to study the pooled prevalence among pregnant women. Results The random effects combined estimate was 32.35% (95% CI, (12.58–117.48). High heterogeneity (tau2 = 0.39, I2 = 100%) and high risk of bias was observed among the selected studies. The test for overall effect was observed to be z = 2.54(P = 0.01). Conclusion Pooled estimate > 30% emphasizes the need for screening through antenatal care services and initiate preventive measures to address the deficiency.

scholarly journals Misuse of medication in adult substance misuse services: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e047283
Author(s):  
Rosalind Gittins ◽  
Louise Missen ◽  
Ian Maidment
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Substance Misuse ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Opioid Analgesics ◽  
Physical And Mental Health ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Treatment Services ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionThere is a growing concern about the misuse of over the counter (OTC) and prescription only medication (POM) because of the impact on physical and mental health, drug interactions, overdoses and drug-related deaths. These medicines include opioid analgesics, anxiolytics such as pregabalin and diazepam and antidepressants. This protocol outlines how a systematic review will be undertaken (during June 2021), which aims to examine the literature on the pattern of OTC and POM misuse among adults who are accessing substance misuse treatment services. It will include the types of medication being taken, prevalence and demographic characteristics of people who access treatment services.Methods and analysisAn electronic search will be conducted on the Cochrane, OVID Medline, Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases as well as grey literature. Two independent reviewers will conduct the initial title and abstract screenings, using predetermined criteria for inclusion and exclusion. If selected for inclusion, full-text data extraction will be conducted using a pilot-tested data extraction form. A third reviewer will resolve disagreements if consensus cannot be reached. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted for all included studies. A qualitative synthesis and summary of the data will be provided. If possible, a meta-analysis with heterogeneity calculation will be conducted; otherwise, Synthesis Without Meta-analysis will be undertaken for quantitative data. The reporting of this protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be peer reviewed, published and shared verbally, electronically and in print, with interested clinicians and policymakers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020135216.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document