Search

Purpose: Inform health system improvements by summarizing components of integrated care in older populations. Identify key implementation barriers and facilitators.Data Sources: A scoping review was undertaken for evidence from MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, organizational websites and internet searches. Eligible publications included reviews, reports, individual studies and policy documents published from 2005 to February 2017.Study Selection: Initial eligible documents were reviews or reports concerning integrated care approaches in older/frail populations. Other documents were later sourced to identify and contextualize implementation issues.Data Extraction: Study findings and implementation barriers and facilitators were charted and thematically synthesized.Results Of Data Synthesis: Thematic synthesis using 30 publications identified 8 important components for integrated care in elderly and frail populations: (i) care continuity/transitions; (ii) enabling policies/governance; (iii) shared values/goals; (iv) person-centred care; (v) multi-/inter-disciplinary services; (vi) effective communication; (vii) case management; (viii) needs assessments for care and discharge planning. Intervention outcomes and implementation issues (barriers or facilitators) tend to depend heavily on the context and programme objectives. Implementation issues in four main areas were observed: (i) Macro-level contextual factors; (ii) Miso-level system organization (funding, leadership, service structure and culture); (iii) Miso-level intervention organization (characteristics, resources and credibility) and (iv) Micro-level factors (shared values, engagement and communication).Conclusion: Improving integration in care requires many components. However, local barriers and facilitators need to be considered. Changes are expected to occur slowly and are more likely to be successful where elements of integrated care are well incorporated into local settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: High blood pressure is a strong risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the associations of dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) with systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in healthy individuals. Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was carried out. Databases were searched for eligible RCTs in 2 phases. MEDLINE, Embase, CAB Abstracts, BIOSIS, ISI Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1990 to December 2009. An updated search was undertaken with the use of MEDLINE and Embase from January 2010 to September 2016. Trials were included if they reported author-defined high- and low-GI or -GL diets and blood pressure, were of ≥6 wk duration, and comprised healthy participants without chronic conditions. Data were extracted and analyzed with the use of Stata statistical software. Pooled estimates and 95% CIs were calculated with the use of weighted mean differences and random-effects models. Results: Data were extracted from 14 trials comprising 1097 participants. Thirteen trials provided information on differences in GI between control and intervention arms. A median reduction in GI of 10 units reduced the overall pooled estimates for SBP and DBP by 1.1 mm Hg (95% CI: -0.3, 2.5 mm Hg; P = 0.11) and 1.3 mm Hg (95% CI: 0.2 mm Hg, 2.3; P = 0.02), respectively. Nine trials reported information on differences in GL between arms. A median reduction in GL of 28 units reduced the overall pooled estimates for SBP and DBP by 2.0 mm Hg (95% CI: 0.2, 3.8 mm Hg; P = 0.03) and 1.4 mm Hg (95% CI: 0.1, 2.6 mm Hg; P = 0.03), respectively. Conclusions: This review of healthy individuals indicated that a lower glycemic diet may lead to important reductions in blood pressure. However, many of the trials included in the analysis reported important sources of bias. This trial was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42016049026. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is possible that cross-over studies included in current systematic reviews are being inadequately assessed, because the current risk of bias tools do not consider possible biases specific to cross-over design. We performed this study to evaluate whether this was being done in cross-over studies included in Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSRs). Methods: We searched the Cochrane Library (up to 2013 issue 5) for CSRs that included at least one cross-over trial. Two authors independently undertook the study selection and data extraction. A random sample of the CSRs was selected and we evaluated whether the cross-over trials in these CSRs were assessed according to criteria suggested by the Cochrane handbook. In addition we reassessed the risk of bias of these cross-over trials by a checklist developed form the Cochrane handbook. Results: We identified 688 CSRs that included one or more cross-over studies. We chose a random sample of 60 CSRs and these included 139 cross-over studies. None of these CSRs undertook a risk of bias assessment specific for cross-over studies. In fact items specific for cross-over studies were seldom considered anywhere in quality assessment of these CSRs. When we reassessed the risk of bias, including the 3 items specific to cross-over trials, of these 139 studies, a low risk of bias was judged for appropriate cross-over design in 110(79%), carry-over effects in 48(34%) and for reporting data in all stages of the trial in 114(82%).Assessment of biases in cross-over trials could affect the GRADE assessment of a review’s findings. Conclusion: The current Cochrane risk of bias tool is not adequate to assess cross-over studies. Items specific to cross-over trials leading to potential risk of bias are generally neglected in CSRs. A proposed check list for the evaluation of cross-over trials is provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To inform health system improvements for care of elderly populations approaching the end of life (EOL) by identifying important elements of care and implementation barriers and facilitators. Design A scoping review was carried out to identify key themes in EOL care. Articles were identified from MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, organizational websites, and internet searches. Eligible publications included reviews, reports, and policy documents published between 2005 and 2016. Initially, eligible documents included reviews or reports concerning effective or important models or components of EOL care in older populations, and evidence was thematically synthesized. Later, other documents were identified to contextualize implementation issues. Results Thematic synthesis using 35 reports identified key features in EOL care: (1) enabling policies and environments; (2) care pathways and models; (3) assessment and prognostication; (4) advance care planning and advance directives; (5) palliative and hospice care; (6) integrated and multidisciplinary care; (7) effective communication; (8) staff training and experience; (9) emotional and spiritual support; (10) personalized care; and (11) resources. Barriers in implementing EOL care include fragmented services, poor communication, difficult prognostication, difficulty in accepting prognosis, and the curative focus in medical care. Conclusions Quality EOL care for older populations requires many core components but the local context and implementation issues may ultimately determine if these elements can be incorporated into the system to improve care. Changes at the macro-level (system/national), meso-level (organizational), and micro-level (individual) will be required to successfully implement service changes to provide holistic and person-centered EOL care for elderly populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a summary of a research paper on the association of dietary fibre intake and risk of cardiovascular disease that was published on bmj.com. The study explored potential dose-response associations and attempts to quantify the potential sources of heterogeneity between included studies. Findings revealed that for each increase of seven grams per day intake of fibre, separate risks for cardiovascular disease and coronary heart disease were each nine percent lower.