FreshRSS

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

Evidence for clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications among adults with peripheral artery disease: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Por: de Launay · D. · Paquet · M. · Kirkham · A. M. · Graham · I. D. · Fergusson · D. A. · Nagpal · S. K. · Shorr · R. · Grimshaw · J. M. · Roberts · D. J.
Introduction

International guidelines recommend that adults with peripheral artery disease (PAD) be prescribed antiplatelet, statin and antihypertensive medications. However, it is unclear how often people with PAD are underprescribed these drugs, which characteristics predict clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications, and whether underprescription and non-adherence are associated with adverse health and health system outcomes.

Methods and analysis

We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews from 2006 onwards. Two investigators will independently review abstracts and full-text studies. We will include studies that enrolled adults and reported the incidence and/or prevalence of clinician underprescription of or patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications among people with PAD; adjusted risk factors for underprescription of/non-adherence to these medications; and adjusted associations between underprescription/non-adherence to these medications and outcomes. Outcomes will include mortality, major adverse cardiac and limb events (including revascularisation procedures and amputations), other reported morbidities, healthcare resource use and costs. Two investigators will independently extract data and evaluate study risk of bias. We will calculate summary estimates of the incidence and prevalence of clinician underprescription/patient non-adherence across studies. We will also conduct subgroup meta-analyses and meta-regression to determine if estimates vary by country, characteristics of the patients and treating clinicians, population-based versus non-population-based design, and study risks of bias. Finally, we will calculate pooled adjusted risk factors for underprescription/non-adherence and adjusted associations between underprescription/non-adherence and outcomes. We will use Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation to determine estimate certainty.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval is not required as we are studying published data. This systematic review will synthesise existing evidence regarding clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications in adults with PAD. Results will be used to identify evidence-care gaps and inform where interventions may be required to improve clinician prescribing and patient adherence to prescribed medications.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42022362801.

Codesigning enhanced models of care for Northern Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth with type 2 diabetes: study protocol

Por: Kirkham · R. · Puszka · S. · Titmuss · A. · Freeman · N. · Weaver · E. · Morris · J. · Mack · S. · O'Donnell · V. · Boffa · J. · Dowler · J. · Ellis · E. · Corpus · S. · Graham · S. · Scott · L. · Sinha · A. K. · Connors · C. · Shaw · J. E. · Azzopardi · P. · Brown · A. · Davis · E. · Wicklow
Introduction

Premature onset of type 2 diabetes and excess mortality are critical issues internationally, particularly in Indigenous populations. There is an urgent need for developmentally appropriate and culturally safe models of care. We describe the methods for the codesign, implementation and evaluation of enhanced models of care with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth living with type 2 diabetes across Northern Australia.

Methods and analysis

Our mixed-methods approach is informed by the principles of codesign. Across eight sites in four regions, the project brings together the lived experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people (aged 10–25) with type 2 diabetes, their families and communities, and health professionals providing diabetes care through a structured yet flexible codesign process. Participants will help identify and collaborate in the development of a range of multifaceted improvements to current models of care. These may include addressing needs identified in our formative work such as the development of screening and management guidelines, referral pathways, peer support networks, diabetes information resources and training for health professionals in youth type 2 diabetes management. The codesign process will adopt a range of methods including qualitative interviews, focus group discussions, art-based methods and healthcare systems assessments. A developmental evaluation approach will be used to create and refine the components and principles of enhanced models of care. We anticipate that this codesign study will produce new theoretical insights and practice frameworks, resources and approaches for age-appropriate, culturally safe models of care.

Ethics and dissemination

The study design was developed in collaboration with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous researchers, health professionals and health service managers and has received ethical approval across all sites. A range of outputs will be produced to disseminate findings to participants, other stakeholders and the scholarly community using creative and traditional formats.

Protocol of a scoping review of outcome domains in dermatology

Por: Nadir · U. · Ahmed · A. · Yi · M. D. · Hisham · F. I. · Dave · L. · Kottner · J. · Ezzedine · K. · Garg · A. · Ingram · J. R. · Jemec · G. B. E. · Spuls · P. I. · Kirkham · J. J. · Cahn · B. · Alam · M.
Introduction

Core outcome sets (COSs) are agreed outcomes (domains (subdomains) and instruments) that should be measured as a minimum in clinical trials or practice in certain diseases or clinical fields. Worldwide, the number of COSs is increasing and there might be conceptual overlaps of domains (subdomains) and instruments within disciplines. The aim of this scoping review is to map and to classify all outcomes identified with COS projects relating to skin diseases.

Methods and analysis

We will conduct a scoping review of outcomes of skin disease-related COS initiatives to identify all concepts and their definitions. We will search PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library. The search dates will be 1 January 2010 (the point at which Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) was established) to 1 January 2024. We will also review the COMET database and C3 website to identify parts of COSs (domains and/or instruments) that are being developed and published. This review will be supplemented by querying relevant stakeholders from COS organisations, dermatology organisations and patient organisations for additional COSs that were developed. The resulting long lists of outcomes will then be mapped into conceptually similar concepts.

Ethics and dissemination

This study was supported by departmental research funds from the Department of Dermatology at Northwestern University. An ethics committee review was waived since this protocol was done by staff researchers with no involvement of patient care. Conflicts of interests, if any, will be addressed by replacing participants with relevant conflicts or reassigning them. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals, social media posts and promotion by COS organisations.

Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for neonatal sepsis (NESCOS)

by Petek Eylul Taneri, Jamie J. Kirkham, Eleanor J. Molloy, Linda Biesty, Richard A. Polin, James L. Wynn, Barbara J. Stoll, Niranjan Kissoon, Kondwani Kawaza, Mandy Daly, Aoife Branagan, Lívia Nagy Bonnard, Eric Giannoni, Tobias Strunk, Magdalena Ohaja, Kenneth Mugabe, Denise Suguitani, Fiona Quirke, Declan Devane

Neonatal sepsis is a serious public health problem; however, there is substantial heterogeneity in the outcomes measured and reported in research evaluating the effectiveness of the treatments. Therefore, we aim to develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for studies evaluating the effectiveness of treatments for neonatal sepsis. Since a systematic review of key outcomes from randomised trials of therapeutic interventions in neonatal sepsis was published recently, we will complement this with a qualitative systematic review of the key outcomes of neonatal sepsis identified by parents, other family members, parent representatives, healthcare providers, policymakers, and researchers. We will interpret the outcomes of both studies using a previously established framework. Stakeholders across three different groups i.e., (1) researchers, (2) healthcare providers, and (3) patients’ parents/family members and parent representatives will rate the importance of the outcomes in an online Real-Time Delphi Survey. Afterwards, consensus meetings will be held to agree on the final COS through online discussions with key stakeholders. This COS is expected to minimize outcome heterogeneity in measurements and publications, improve comparability and synthesis, and decrease research waste.
❌