FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

IMproving psYchosocial adjustment to Traumatic Brain Injury from acute to chronic injury through development and evaluation of the myTBI online psychoeducation platform: protocol for a mixed-methods study

Por: Troeung · L. · Sarunga Raja · T. L. · Mann · G. · Wagland · J. · MacLeod · C. · Martini · A.
Introduction

This protocol describes the myTBI study which aims to: (1) develop an online psychoeducation platform for people with traumatic brain injury (TBI), their family members/caregivers, and healthcare staff to improve psychosocial adjustment to TBI across different phases of injury (acute, postacute, and chronic), and (2) undertake an evaluation of efficacy, acceptability, and feasibility.

Methods and analysis

A three-stage mixed-methods research design will be used. The study will be undertaken across four postacute community-based neurorehabilitation and disability support services in Western Australia. Stage 1 (interviews and surveys) will use consumer-driven qualitative methodology to: (1) understand the recovery experiences and psychosocial challenges of people with TBI over key stages (acute, postacute, and chronic), and (2) identify required areas of psychosocial support to inform the psychoeducation platform development. Stage 2 (development) will use a Delphi expert consensus method to: (1) determine the final psychoeducation modules, and (2) perform acceptance testing of the myTBI platform. Finally, stage 3 (evaluation) will be a randomised stepped-wedge trial to evaluate efficacy, acceptability, and feasibility. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, postintervention, follow-up, and at final discharge from services. Change in outcomes will be analysed using multilevel mixed-effects modelling. Follow-up surveys will be conducted to evaluate acceptability and feasibility.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval was granted by North Metropolitan Health Service Mental Health Research Ethics and Governance Office (RGS0000005877). Study findings will be relevant to clinicians, researchers, and organisations who are seeking a cost-effective solution to deliver ongoing psychoeducation and support to individuals with TBI across the recovery journey.

Trial registration number

ACTRN12623000990628.

Trends in inequalities in avoidable hospitalisations across the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort study of 23.5 million people in England

Objective

To determine whether periods of disruption were associated with increased ‘avoidable’ hospital admissions and wider social inequalities in England.

Design

Observational repeated cross-sectional study.

Setting

England (January 2019 to March 2022).

Participants

With the approval of NHS England we used individual-level electronic health records from OpenSAFELY, which covered ~40% of general practices in England (mean monthly population size 23.5 million people).

Primary and secondary outcome measures

We estimated crude and directly age-standardised rates for potentially preventable unplanned hospital admissions: ambulatory care sensitive conditions and urgent emergency sensitive conditions. We considered how trends in these outcomes varied by three measures of social and spatial inequality: neighbourhood socioeconomic deprivation, ethnicity and geographical region.

Results

There were large declines in avoidable hospitalisations during the first national lockdown (March to May 2020). Trends increased post-lockdown but never reached 2019 levels. The exception to these trends was for vaccine-preventable ambulatory care sensitive admissions which remained low throughout 2020–2021. While trends were consistent by each measure of inequality, absolute levels of inequalities narrowed across levels of neighbourhood socioeconomic deprivation, Asian ethnicity (compared with white ethnicity) and geographical region (especially in northern regions).

Conclusions

We found no evidence that periods of healthcare disruption from the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in more avoidable hospitalisations. Falling avoidable hospital admissions has coincided with declining inequalities most strongly by level of deprivation, but also for Asian ethnic groups and northern regions of England.

Where are the inequalities in colorectal cancer care in a country with universal healthcare? A systematic review and narrative synthesis

Por: Pickwell-Smith · B. A. · Spencer · K. · Sadeghi · M. H. · Greenley · S. · Lind · M. · Macleod · U.
Objective

Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer living in more deprived areas experience worse survival than those in more affluent areas. Those living in more deprived areas face barriers to accessing timely, quality healthcare. These barriers may contribute to socioeconomic inequalities in survival. We evaluated the literature for any association between socioeconomic group, hospital delay and treatments received among patients with colorectal cancer in the UK, a country with universal healthcare.

Design

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCIE, AMED and PsycINFO were searched from inception to January 2023. Grey literature, including HMIC, BASE and Google Advanced Search, and forward and backward citation searches were conducted. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts and full-text articles. Observational UK-based studies were included if they reported socioeconomic measures and an association with either hospital delay or treatments received. The QUIPS tool assessed bias risk, and a narrative synthesis was conducted. The review is reported to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020.

Results

41 of the 7209 identified references were included. 12 studies evaluated 7 different hospital intervals. There was a significant association between area-level deprivation and a longer time from first presentation in primary care to diagnosis. 32 studies evaluated treatments received. There were socioeconomic inequalities in surgery and chemotherapy but not radiotherapy.

Conclusion

Patients with colorectal cancer face inequalities across the cancer care continuum. Further research is needed to understand why and what evidence-based actions can reduce these inequalities in treatment. Qualitative research of patients and clinicians conducted across various settings would provide a rich understanding of the complex factors that drive these inequalities. Further research should also consider using a causal approach to future studies to considerably strengthen the interpretation. Clinicians can try and mitigate some potential causes of colorectal cancer inequalities, including signposting to financial advice and patient transport schemes.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42022347652.

❌