Project description:The use of multiple medications is common following a stroke for secondary prevention and management of co-occurring chronic conditions. Given the use of multiple medications post-stroke, optimizing medication self-management for this population is important. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and summarize what has been reported in the literature on interventions related to medication self-management for adults (aged 18+) with stroke. Electronic databases (Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, Ovid PsycINFO, Web of Science) and grey literature were searched to identify relevant articles. For inclusion, articles were required to include an adult population with stroke undergoing an intervention aimed at modifying or improving medication management that incorporated a component of self-management. Two independent reviewers screened the articles for inclusion. Data were extracted and summarized using descriptive content analysis. Of the 56 articles that met the inclusion criteria, the focus of most interventions was on improvement of secondary stroke prevention through risk factor management and lifestyle modifications. The majority of studies included medication self-management as a component of a broader intervention. Most interventions used both face-to-face interactions and technology for delivery. Behavioural outcomes, specifically medication adherence, were the most commonly targeted outcomes across the interventions. However, the majority of interventions did not specifically or holistically target medication self-management. There is an opportunity to better support medication self-management post-stroke by ensuring interventions are delivered across sectors or in the community, developing an understanding of the optimal frequency and duration of delivery, and qualitatively exploring experiences with the interventions to ensure ongoing improvement.
Project description:BackgroundMultiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune disease that is often treated with multiple medications. Managing multiple medications, also known as polypharmacy, can be challenging for persons with MS. Toolkits are instructional resources designed to promote behaviour change. Toolkits may support medication self-management for adults with MS, as they have been useful in other populations with chronic conditions.ObjectiveThe main purpose of this review was to identify and summarize medication self-management toolkits for MS, as related to the design, delivery, components, and measures used to evaluate implementation and/or outcomes.MethodsA scoping review was conducted following guidelines by JBI. Articles were included if they focused on adults (18 years or older) with MS.ResultsSix articles reporting on four unique toolkits were included. Most toolkits were technology-based, including mobile or online applications, with only one toolkit being paper-based. The toolkits varied in type, frequency, and duration of medication management support. Varying outcomes were also identified, but there were improvements reported in symptom management, medication adherence, decision-making, and quality of life. The six studies were quantitative in design, with no studies exploring the user experience from a qualitative or mixed-methods design.ConclusionsThere is limited research on medication self-management toolkits among adults with MS. Future development, implementation, and evaluation mixed-methods research are needed to explore user experiences and overall design of toolkits.
Project description:IntroductionMedication non-adherence is an important public health issue, associated with poor clinical and economic outcomes. Globally, self-reported instruments are the most widely used method to assess medication adherence. However, the majority of these were developed in high-income countries (HICs) with a well-established health care system. Their applicability in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remains unclear. The objective of this study is to systematically review the applicability of content and use of self-reported adherence instruments in LMICs.MethodA scoping review informed by a literature search in Pubmed, EBSCO, and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify studies assessing medication adherence using self-reported instruments for patients with five common chronic diseases [hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, asthma, or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)] in LMICs up to January 2022 with no constraints on publication year. Two reviewers performed the study selection process, data extraction and outcomes assessment independently. Outcomes focused on LMIC applicability of the self-reported adherence instruments assessed by (i) containing LMIC relevant adherence content; (ii) methodological quality and (iii) fees for use.FindingsWe identified 181 studies that used self-reported instruments for assessing medication adherence in LMICs. A total of 32 distinct types of self-reported instruments to assess medication adherence were identified. Of these, 14 self-reported instruments were developed in LMICs, while the remaining ones were adapted from self-reported instruments originally developed in HICs. All self-reported adherence instruments in studies included presented diverse potential challenges regarding their applicability in LMICs, included an underrepresentation of LMIC relevant non-adherence reasons, such as financial issues, use of traditional medicines, religious beliefs, lack of communication with healthcare provider, running out of medicine, and access to care. Almost half of included studies showed that the existing self-reported adherence instruments lack sufficient evidence regarding cross cultural validation and internal consistency. In 70% of the studies, fees applied for using the self-reported instruments in LMICs.ConclusionThere seems insufficient emphasis on applicability and methodological rigor of self-reported medication adherence instruments used in LMICs. This presents an opportunity for developing a self-reported adherence instrument that is suitable to health systems and resources in LMICs.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42022302215.
Project description:BackgroundPersons with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) use multiple medications (polypharmacy) to manage the high number of secondary complications and concurrent conditions. Despite the prevalence of polypharmacy and challenges associated with managing medications, there are few tools to support medication self-management for persons with SCI.ObjectiveThe purpose of this scoping review was to identify and summarize what is reported in the literature on medication self-management interventions for adults with traumatic SCI.MethodsElectronic databases and grey literature were searched for articles that included an adult population with a traumatic SCI and an intervention targeting medication management. The intervention was required to incorporate a component of self-management. Articles were double screened and data were extracted and synthesized using descriptive approaches.ResultsThree studies were included in this review, all of which were quantitative. A mobile app and two education-based interventions to address self-management of SCI, medication management, and pain management, respectively, were included. Only one of the interventions was co-developed with patients, caregivers, and clinicians. There was minimal overlap in the outcomes measured across the studies, but learning outcomes (e.g., perceived knowledge and confidence), behavioural outcomes (e.g., management strategies, data entry), and clinical outcomes (e.g., number of medications, pain scores, functional outcomes) were evaluated. Results of the interventions varied, but some positive outcomes were noted.ConclusionsThere is an opportunity to better support medication self-management for persons with SCI by co-designing an intervention with end-users that comprehensively addresses self-management. This will aid in understanding why interventions work, for whom, in what setting, and under what circumstances.
Project description:BackgroundWearable devices (WDs) have evolved beyond simple fitness trackers to sophisticated health monitors capable of measuring vital signs, such as heart rate and blood oxygen levels. Their application in health care, particularly medication management, is an emerging field poised to significantly enhance patient adherence to treatment regimens. Despite their widespread use and increasing incorporation into clinical trials, a comprehensive review of WDs in terms of medication adherence has not been conducted.ObjectiveThis study aimed to conduct a comprehensive scoping review to evaluate the impact of WDs on medication adherence across a variety of diseases, summarizing key research findings, outcomes, and challenges encountered.MethodsAdhering to PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, a structured search was conducted across MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase databases, covering the literature from January 1, 2010, to September 30, 2022. The search strategy was based on terms related to WDs and medication adherence, specifically focusing on empirical studies to ensure the inclusion of original research findings. Studies were selected based on their relevance to medication adherence, usage of WDs in detecting medication-taking actions, and their role in integrated medication management systems.ResultsWe screened 657 articles and identified 18 articles. The identified studies demonstrated the diverse applications of WDs in enhancing medication adherence across diseases such as Parkinson disease, diabetes, and cardiovascular conditions. The geographical distribution and publication years of these studies indicate a growing interest in this research area. The studies were divided into three types: (1) studies reporting a correlation between data from WDs or their usage and medication adherence or drug usage as outcomes, (2) studies using WDs to detect the act of medication-taking itself, and (3) studies proposing an integrated medication management system that uses WDs in managing medication.ConclusionsWDs are increasingly being recognized for their potential to enhance medication management and adherence. This review underscores the need for further empirical research to validate the effectiveness of WDs in real-life settings and explore their use in predicting adherence based on activity rhythms and activities. Despite technological advancements, challenges remain regarding the integration of WDs into routine clinical practice. Future research should focus on leveraging the comprehensive data provided by WDs to develop personalized medication management strategies that can improve patient outcomes.
Project description:BackgroundAdditional billing is commonly and legally practiced in some countries for patients covered by health insurance. However, knowledge and understanding of the additional billings are limited. This study reviews evidence on additional billing practices including definition, scope of practice, regulations and their effects on insured patients.MethodsA systematic search of the full-text papers that provided the details of balance billing for health services, written in English, and published between 2000 and 2021 was carried out in Scopus, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science. Articles were screened independently by at least 2 reviewers for eligibility. Thematic analysis was applied.ResultsIn total, 94 studies were selected for the final analysis. Most of the included articles (83%) reported findings from the United States (US). Numerous terms of additional billings were used across countries such as balance billing, surprise billing, extra billing, supplements and out-of-pocket (OOP) spending. The range of services incurred these additional bills also varied across countries, insurance plans, and healthcare facilities; the frequently reported were emergency services, surgeries, and specialist consultation. There were a few positive though more studies reported negative effects of the substantial additional bills which undermined universal health coverage (UHC) goals by causing financial hardship and reducing access to care. A range of government measures had been applied to mitigate these adverse effects, but some difficulties still exist.ConclusionAdditional billings varied in terms of terminology, definitions, practices, profiles, regulations, and outcomes. There were a set of policy tools aimed to control substantial billing to insured patients despite some limitations and challenges. Governments should apply multiple policy measures to improve financial risk protection to the insured population.
Project description:Acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with persistent renal dysfunction, the receipt of dialysis, dialysis dependence, and mortality. Accordingly, the concept of major adverse kidney events (MAKE) has been adopted as an endpoint for assessing the impact of AKI. However, applied criteria or observation periods for operationalizing MAKE appear to vary across studies. To evaluate this heterogeneity for MAKE evaluation, we performed a systematic scoping review of studies that employed MAKE as an AKI endpoint. Four major academic databases were searched, and we identified 122 studies with increasing numbers over time. We found marked heterogeneity in applied criteria and observation periods for MAKE across these studies, with some even lacking a description of criteria. Moreover, 13 different observation periods were employed, with 30 days and 90 days as the most common. Persistent renal dysfunction was evaluated by estimated glomerular filtration rate (34%) or serum creatinine concentration (48%); however, 37 different definitions for this component were employed in terms of parameters, cut-off criteria, and assessment periods. The definition for the dialysis component also showed significant heterogeneity regarding assessment periods and duration of dialysis requirement (chronic vs temporary). Finally, MAKE rates could vary by 7% [interquartile range: 1.7-16.7%] with different observation periods or by 36.4% with different dialysis component definitions. Our findings revealed marked heterogeneity in MAKE definitions, particularly regarding component assessment and observation periods. Dedicated discussion is needed to establish uniform and acceptable standards to operationalize MAKE in terms of selection and applied criteria of components, observation period, and reporting criteria for future trials on AKI and related conditions.
Project description:BackgroundWith rising healthcare costs over the last decades, the concept of efficiency has gained popularity in healthcare provision research. As efficiency can be understood and measured in many different ways, it is often unclear what is meant by "efficient health systems" or "efficient healthcare providers".ObjectivesThis study aims to analyze and categorize the different definitions and understandings of "efficiency" used in healthcare provision research over time.MethodsWe searched five databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Business Source Premier, and EconLit) to conduct a scoping review. Sources were screened independently by two researchers, using the online software Rayyan. Results are reported using PRISMA-ScR.ResultsOf 1,441 individual sources identified, 389 were included in the review. Most papers (77.3%) using the term "efficiency" do not include explicit definitions or explanations of their understanding of it. Almost all papers (99.0%) are interested in productive efficiency (vs. allocative efficiency) and more specifically technical efficiency, therefore comparing the number of inputs used and outputs produced. While many papers (70.4%) include some elements of quality of care or health outcomes in their discussion, few (30.3%) include aspects of quality in their measurement of efficiency. Over the last decades, Data Envelopment Analysis has become the main method to measure efficiency. We propose a broad categorization of efficiency definitions that could be used by researchers to improve the comprehensibility and comparability of their research. Key features are the general type of efficiency, inclusion of quality or outcome information, and inclusion of cost information.DiscussionTo allow for better comparability and comprehensibility, researchers in healthcare provision should state explicitly which type of efficiency they are studying. To do this, we propose to use combinations of the terms productive efficiency, allocative efficiency, quality-inclusive efficiency, and cost efficiency.
Project description:BackgroundAdvances in medicine and technology that have made it possible to support, repair, or replace failing organs challenge commonly held notions of life and death. The objective of this review is to develop a comprehensive description of the current understandings of the public regarding the meaning/definition and determination of death.MethodsThis scoping review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. Online databases were used to identify articles published from 2003 to 2021. Two reviewers (S.S. and K.Z.) screened the articles using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data for specific content variables, and performed descriptive examination. Complementary searches of reference lists complemented the final study selection. A search strategy using vocabulary of the respective databases was created, and criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of the articles were established.ResultsSeven thousand four hundred twenty-eight references were identified. Sixty were retained for analysis, with 4 additional references added from complementary searches. A data extraction instrument was developed to iteratively chart the results. A qualitative approach was conducted to thematically analyze the data. Themes included public understanding/attitudes toward death and determination of death (neurological determination and cardiocirculatory determination of death), death and organ donation, public trust and legal variability, and media impacts.ConclusionsThis review provides a current and comprehensive overview of the literature related to the general public's understanding and attitudes toward death and death determination and serves to highlight the gaps in this topic.