Conectar
by Daniel W. Flowers, Brian T. Swanson, Stephen M. Shaffer, Derek J. Clewley, Sean P. Riley
The primary objective of this review was to create a ‘trustworthy,’ living systematic review and meta-analysis for the application of manual therapy interventions in treating patients with shoulder dysfunction. Included studies were English-language randomized controlled trials published between 1/1/2010 and 8/3/2023, with searches performed in: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINHAL, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health, EBSCO Medline, and PEDro. The population of focus included adults 18 years and older with musculoskeletal impairments related to shoulder dysfunction. Our primary outcomes included pain and region-specific outcome measures. We excluded trials, including participants having shoulder dysfunction resulting from surgery, radicular pain, instability/dislocation, fracture, lymphedema, and radiation. Our screening methodology was based upon a previously published ‘trustworthy’ systematic review protocol. This included the application of our PICOTS criteria in addition to screening for prospective clinical trial registration and following of prospective intent, as well as assessment of PEDro scores, risk-of-bias ratings, GRADE scoring, and examination of confidence in estimated effects. Twenty-six randomized controlled trials met our PICOTS criteria; however, only 15 of these were registered. Only three were registered prospectively. Two of these did not have discussions and conclusions that aligned with their primary outcome. The remaining single study was found to have a high risk-of-bias, meaning the remainder of the protocol could not be employed and that no randomized controlled trials could undergo further assessment or meta-analysis. The results of this systematic review indicate there are no ‘trustworthy’ randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of manual therapy interventions for the treatment of patients with shoulder dysfunction, as defined by the prospectively established methodology. Therefore, these findings signal that creating a ‘trustworthy,’ living systematic review on this clinically relevant topic is not yet possible due to a lack of ‘trustworthy’ randomized controlled trials.In this study, we aimed to characterize the impact of long COVID on quality of life and approaches to symptom management among Black American adults.
As a novel condition, qualitative evidence concerning long COVID symptoms and their impact on quality of life can inform the refinement of diagnostic criteria and care plans. However, the underrepresentation of Black Americans in long COVID research is a barrier to achieving equitable care for all long COVID patients.
We employed an interpretive description study design.
We recruited a convenience sample of 15 Black American adults with long COVID. We analysed the anonymized transcripts from race-concordant, semi-structured interviews using an inductive, thematic analysis approach. We followed the SRQR reporting guidelines.
We identified four themes: (1) The impact of long COVID symptoms on personal identity and pre-existing conditions; (2) Self-management strategies for long COVID symptoms; (3) Social determinants of health and symptom management; and (4) Effects on interpersonal relationships.
Findings demonstrate the comprehensive ramifications of long COVID on the lives of Black American adults. Results also articulate how pre-existing conditions, social risk factors, distrust due to systemic racism, and the nature of interpersonal relationships can complicate symptom management.
Care approaches that support access to and implementation of integrative therapies may be best suited to meet the needs of long COVID patients. Clinicians should also prioritize eliminating patient exposure to discrimination, implicit bias, and microaggressions. This is of particular concern for long COVID patients who have symptoms that are difficult to objectively quantify, such as pain and fatigue.
While patient perspectives and experiences were the focus of this study, patients were not involved with the design or conduct of the study, data analysis or interpretation, or writing the manuscript.
Daily calcium supplements are recommended for pregnant women from 20 weeks’ gestation to prevent pre-eclampsia in populations with low dietary calcium intake. We aimed to improve understanding of barriers and facilitators for calcium supplement intake during pregnancy to prevent pre-eclampsia.
Mixed-method systematic review, with confidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.
MEDLINE and EMBASE (via Ovid), CINAHL and Global Health (via EBSCO) and grey literature databases were searched up to 17 September 2022.
We included primary qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies reporting implementation or use of calcium supplements during pregnancy, excluding calcium fortification and non-primary studies. No restrictions were imposed on settings, language or publication date.
Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We analysed the qualitative data using thematic synthesis, and quantitative findings were thematically mapped to qualitative findings. We then mapped the results to behavioural change frameworks to identify barriers and facilitators.
Eighteen reports from nine studies were included in this review. Women reported barriers to consuming calcium supplements included limited knowledge about calcium supplements and pre-eclampsia, fears and experiences of side effects, varying preferences for tablets, dosing, working schedules, being away from home and taking other supplements. Receiving information regarding pre-eclampsia and safety of calcium supplement use from reliable sources, alternative dosing options, supplement reminders, early antenatal care, free supplements and support from families and communities were reported as facilitators. Healthcare providers felt that consistent messaging about benefits and risks of calcium, training, and ensuring adequate staffing and calcium supply is available would be able to help them in promoting calcium.
Relevant stakeholders should consider the identified barriers and facilitators when formulating interventions and policies on calcium supplement use. These review findings can inform implementation to ensure effective and equitable provision and scale-up of calcium interventions.
CRD42021239143.
Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) are a global high-stakes patient safety issue. Key stakeholder perspectives regarding their role and experiences with pressure injuries is critical as part of the solution to minimizing HAPI occurrence and attain sustainability.
A qualitative, descriptive approach provided multiple perspectives of key stakeholders to support the complexity of HAPI care. The qualitative data are a part of a mixed method convergent research study examining pressure injury prevention and management practices.
Nursing system theory, mixed method convergent design, and participatory action research methodologies were chosen to address both the gap analysis development and results, achieve collaborative comprehensiveness, and enable key stakeholder involvement throughout this HAPI prevention and management initiative. Participants were recruited and enrolled from a large Level I trauma hospital and the key stakeholders. Demographic information were collected prior to the individual interview. Focused interviews were conducted virtually using zoom technology. Qualitative data were analyzed using NVivo software and thematic analysis was confirmed across the co-investigators for congruence and applicability to the research questions.
Qualitative interviews with 26 key stakeholders provided data to support and integrate a link with gap analysis results on the complex health issue of HAPIs. Specific barrier and recommendation themes identified interventions that could be prioritized. The 52 barrier and 52 recommendation themes/sub-theme(s) respectively were organized by Donabedian (structure, process, and outcome) with structure elements the majority. The top three structure barrier themes involved equipment and standards for use, staff prevention education, and specialized health professionals. The top three structure recommendation themes involved specialized health professionals, equipment and standards for use, and an educational plan for those at risk or with HAPIs.
The article provides findings from the qualitative portion of a mixed method study related to HAPIs. The qualitative findings associated with the gap analysis quantitative results, achieved the goal of the participatory action research key stakeholders' input into HAPI care and can be replicated internationally.
The benefit of key stakeholder's involvement in solving a clinical problem is sustainability. A quantitative approach and integrating qualitative stakeholders' perspectives provide an in-depth solution that will advance nursing capacity toward health care delivery and HAPI nursing science and policy development on a global level.
Sciatica can be very painful and, in most cases, is due to pressure on a spinal nerve root from a disc herniation with associated inflammation. For some patients, the pain persists, and one management option is a spinal epidural steroid injection (ESI). The aim of an ESI is to relieve leg pain, improve function and reduce the need for surgery. ESIs work well in some patients but not in others, but we cannot identify these patient subgroups currently. This study aims to identify factors, including patient characteristics, clinical examination and imaging findings, that help in predicting who does well and who does not after an ESI. The overall objective is to develop a prognostic model to support individualised patient and clinical decision-making regarding ESI.
POiSE is a prospective cohort study of 439 patients with sciatica referred by their clinician for an ESI. Participants will receive weekly text messages until 12 weeks following their ESIand then again at 24 weeks following their ESI to collect data on leg pain severity. Questionnaires will be sent to participants at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 weeks after their ESI to collect data on pain, disability, recovery and additional interventions. The prognosis for the cohort will be described. The primary outcome measure for the prognostic model is leg pain at 6 weeks. Prognostic models will also be developed for secondary outcomes of disability and recovery at 6 weeks and additional interventions at 24 weeks following ESI. Statistical analyses will include multivariable linear and logistic regression with mixed effects model.
The POiSE study has received ethical approval (South Central Berkshire B Research Ethics Committee 21/SC/0257). Dissemination will be guided by our patient and public engagement group and will include scientific publications, conference presentations and social media.
FreshRSS 