Dataset Information

Allied health professionals: A promising ally in the work against health inequalities- A rapid review.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) have a crucial role in reducing health inequalities. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding the ways they can fulfil this role. This rapid review explores the ways in which AHPs can decrease health care or health outcome inequalities; address inequalities in the social determinants of health; and support disadvantaged groups at an individual, organisational and system level.

Study design

Rapid review following Cochrane criteria and narrative synthesis.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and AMED were searched combined with grey literature, to identify quantitative or qualitative review articles published between January 2010 and February 2021.

Results

From 8727 references, 36 met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed with the AMSTAR tool and was generally low. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the studies, and a narrative synthesis was produced. Three themes emerged at patient and organisational level: 1) access to AHP services; 2) quality of care; and 3) social determinants of health. Two themes emerged at system level: 1) unequal workforce distribution and 2) lack of inclusive clinical guidelines.

Conclusions

This rapid review offers a broad range of evidence on the ways AHPs can contribute to the reduction of inequalities in health care, both in terms of access and quality of care and in health outcomes. More research is needed to further understand the impact of AHPs on inequalities affecting specific groups and their contribution to equitable distribution of social determinants of health.

SUBMITTER: Gkiouleka A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9461647 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Allied health professionals: A promising ally in the work against health inequalities- A rapid review.

Gkiouleka A A Aquino M R J MRJ Ojo-Aromokudu O O van Daalen K R KR Kuhn I L IL Turner-Moss E E Thomas K K Barnard R R Strudwick R R Ford J J

Public health in practice (Oxford, England) 20220507

<h4>Objectives</h4>Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) have a crucial role in reducing health inequalities. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding the ways they can fulfil this role. This rapid review explores the ways in which AHPs can decrease health care or health outcome inequalities; address inequalities in the social determinants of health; and support disadvantaged groups at an individual, organisational and system level.<h4>Study design</h4>Rapid review following Cochrane criteria ...[more]

PMID: 36101762

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBuilding the capacity of allied health professionals to engage in research has been recognised as a priority due to the many benefits it brings for patients, healthcare professionals, healthcare organisations and society more broadly. There is increasing recognition of the need for a coordinated multi-strategy approach to building research capacity. The aim of this systematic review was to identify existing integrated models and frameworks which guide research capacity building for allied health professionals working in publicly funded secondary and tertiary healthcare organisations.MethodsA systematic review was undertaken searching five databases (Medline, CINAHL, Embase, AustHealth and Web of Science) using English language restrictions. Two authors independently screened and reviewed studies, extracted data and performed quality assessments using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Content and thematic analysis methods were used to code and categorise the data.ResultsA total of 8492 unique records were screened by title and abstract, of which 20 were reviewed in full-text. One quantitative study and five qualitative studies were included, each of which describing a research capacity building framework. Three interconnected and interdependent themes were identified as being essential for research capacity building, including 'supporting clinicians in research', 'working together' and 'valuing research for excellence'.ConclusionsThe findings of this systematic review have been synthesised to develop a succinct and integrated framework for research capacity building which is relevant for allied health professionals working in publicly funded secondary and tertiary healthcare organisations. This framework provides further evidence to suggest that research capacity building strategies are interlinked and interdependent and should be implemented as part of an integrated 'whole of system' approach, with commitment and support from all levels of leadership and management. Future directions for research include using behaviour change and knowledge translation theories to guide the implementation and evaluation of this new framework.Trial registrationThe protocol for this systematic review has been registered with PROSPERO. The registration number is CRD42018087476 .

Project description:BackgroundKnowledge translation (KT) is an important means of improving the health service quality. Most research on the effectiveness of KT strategies has focused on individual strategies, i.e., those directly targeting the modification of allied health professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors, for example. In general, these strategies are moderately effective in changing practices (maximum 10% change). Effecting change in organizational contexts (e.g., change readiness, general and specific organizational capacity, organizational routines) is part of a promising new avenue to service quality improvement through the implementation of evidence-based practices. The objective of this study will be to identify why, how, and under what conditions organizational KT strategies have been shown to be effective or ineffective in changing the (a) knowledge, (b) attitudes, and (c) clinical behaviors of allied health professionals in traumatology settings.MethodsThis is a realist review protocol involving four iterative steps: (1) Initial theory formulation, (2) search for Evidence search, (3) knowledge extraction and synthesis, and (4) recommendations. We will search electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, CINHAL, Cochrane Library, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science. The studies included will be those relating to the use of organizational KT strategies in trauma settings, regardless of study designs, published between January 1990 and October 2020, and presenting objective measures that demonstrate change in allied health professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and clinical behaviors. Two independent reviewers will select, screen, and extract the data related to all relevant sources in order to refine or refute the context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations developed in the initial theory and identify new CMO configurations.DiscussionUsing a systematic and rigorous method, this review will help guide decision-makers and researchers in choosing the best organizational strategies to optimize the implementation of evidence-based practices.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020216105.

Project description:BackgroundResearch capacity building (RCB) initiatives have gained steady momentum in health settings across the globe to reduce the gap between research evidence and health practice and policy. RCB strategies are typically multidimensional, comprising several initiatives targeted at different levels within health organisations. Research education and training is a mainstay strategy targeted at the individual level and yet, the evidence for research education in health settings is unclear. This review scopes the literature on research education programs for nurses and allied health professionals, delivered and evaluated in healthcare settings in high-income countries.MethodsThe review was conducted systematically in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology. Eleven academic databases and numerous grey literature platforms were searched. Data were extracted from the included full texts in accordance with the aims of the scoping review. A narrative approach was used to synthesise findings. Program characteristics, approaches to program evaluation and the outcomes reported were extracted and summarised.ResultsDatabase searches for peer-reviewed and grey literature yielded 12,457 unique records. Following abstract and title screening, 207 full texts were reviewed. Of these, 60 records were included. Nine additional records were identified on forward and backward citation searching for the included records, resulting in a total of 69 papers describing 68 research education programs. Research education programs were implemented in fourteen different high-income countries over five decades. Programs were multifaceted, often encompassed experiential learning, with half including a mentoring component. Outcome measures largely reflected lower levels of Barr and colleagues' modified Kirkpatrick educational outcomes typology (e.g., satisfaction, improved research knowledge and confidence), with few evaluated objectively using traditional research milestones (e.g., protocol completion, manuscript preparation, poster, conference presentation). Few programs were evaluated using organisational and practice outcomes. Overall, evaluation methods were poorly described.ConclusionResearch education remains a key strategy to build research capacity for nurses and allied health professionals working in healthcare settings. Evaluation of research education programs needs to be rigorous and, although targeted at the individual, must consider longer-term and broader organisation-level outcomes and impacts. Examining this is critical to improving clinician-led health research and the translation of research into clinical practice.

Project description:BackgroundWith the increasing demand on the global health system and the presence of persistent healthcare disparities, it becomes imperative to utilize the full potential of the healthcare workforce, including allied health professionals (AHPs). To date, no review has mapped the literature on clinical care ratios (CCRs) for AHPs. This information is vital in guiding future work-force planning to address healthcare issues such as understaffed and at capacity hospitals. This scoping review mapped available evidence to offer a comprehensive insight into current AHP CCRs, enabling evidence-based decision-making that ensures optimal care and enhanced system efficiency.MethodsThe scoping review was undertaken using the 'Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews' (PRISMA-ScR). The search was conducted using Ovid (MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO), CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, PEDro, OTseeker and grey literature. Two reviewers independently screened records, following which data extraction was completed for the included studies. Descriptive synthesis was used to summarize the data.ResultsOf the 7670 records identified, 18 studies were included in this review. Whilst there was variability between AHPs on direct clinical time spent with patients, considerable amount of time was also spent on activities beyond direct clinical care. To offset this, literature highlights opportunities for allied health assistants and students to undertake tasks which would free-up AHPs to undertake more direct and higher-level tasks. However, limitations of findings (variability in measurement, lack of coverage of some professions) limits generalisability.ConclusionWhile the literature highlights considerable variability in CCRs among different AHP disciplines, it does appear nearly a nearly a third of time spent by AHPs are on tasks that are beyond direct clinical care. Future research could explore new workforce models which would free-up AHPs to undertake more direct and higher-level tasks.

Project description:BackgroundAllied Health Professionals today are required, more than ever before, to demonstrate their impact. However, despite at least 20 years of expectation, many services fail to deliver routine outcome measurement in practice. This systematic review investigates what helps and hinders routine outcome measurement of allied health professionals practice.MethodsA systematic review protocol was developed comprising: a defined search strategy for PsycINFO, MEDLINE and CINHAL databases and inclusion criteria and systematic procedures for data extraction and quality appraisal. Studies were included if they were published in English and investigated facilitators and/or barriers to routine outcome measurement by allied health professionals. No restrictions were placed on publication type, design, country, or year of publication. Reference lists of included publications were searched to identify additional papers. Descriptive methods were used to synthesise the findings.Results960 papers were retrieved; 15 met the inclusion criteria. Professional groups represented were Physiotherapy, Occupational Therapy, and Speech and Language Therapy. The included literature varied in quality and design. Facilitators and barriers to routine outcome measurement exist at individual, managerial and organisational levels. Key factors affecting professionals' use of routine outcome measurement include: professionals' level of knowledge and confidence about using outcome measures, and the degree of organisational and peer-support professionals received with a view to promoting their work in practice.ConclusionsWhilst the importance of routinely measuring outcomes within the allied health professions is well recognised, it has largely failed to be delivered in practice. Factors that influence clinicians' ability and desire to undertake routine outcome measurement are bi-directional: they can act as either facilitators or barriers. Routine outcome measurement may only be deliverable if appropriate action is taken at individual therapist, team, and organisational levels of an organisation.

Dataset Information

Allied health professionals: A promising ally in the work against health inequalities- A rapid review.

Objectives

Study design

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Allied health professionals: A promising ally in the work against health inequalities- A rapid review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets