Healthcare professionals’ experiences and perspectives on using telehealth for home-based palliative care: a scoping review protocol (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elias David Lundereng ◽  
Andrea Aparecida Goncalves Nes ◽  
Heidi Holmen ◽  
Anette Winger ◽  
Hilde Thygesen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Hand Search ◽  
Home Based ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Analysis Protocol

BACKGROUND Telehealth seems feasible for use in home-based palliative care. However, acceptance among healthcare professionals is essential for the successful delivery of telehealth in practice. No scoping review has mapped the experiences and perspectives of healthcare professionals on the use of telehealth for home-based palliative care. OBJECTIVE To systematically map published studies on healthcare professionals’ experiences and perspectives on the use of telehealth in home-based palliative care. METHODS The proposed scoping review will employ the methodology of Arksey and O’Malley. This protocol is guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocol (PRISMA-P). A systematic search was performed in Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), PsycINFO, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) and Web of Science (WoS) for studies published between January 2000 to July 5, 2021. We will also hand search the reference lists of included papers to identify additional studies of relevance. The search will be updated in 2022. Pairs of authors will independently assess eligibility of studies and extract data. The two first stages of thematic synthesis will be used to thematically organize the data material. Since the scoping review methodology consists of reviewing and collecting data from publicly available materials, this study does not require ethics approval. RESULTS The database searches were performed on July 5, 2021 and the eligibility criteria were tested in July-August 2021. After removal of 2364 duplicates, the search yielded 2420 citations.We will screen titles, abstracts and full-text papers by fall 2021. Results are anticipated by September 2022. CONCLUSIONS A mapping of studies could identify research gaps regarding healthcare professionals’ experiences and perspectives on the use of telehealth in home-based palliative care and may determine the value and feasibility of conducting a full systematic review.

scholarly journals Healthcare professionals’ experiences and perspectives on using telehealth for home-based palliative care: a scoping review protocol (Preprint)

10.2196/33305 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elias David Lundereng ◽  
Andrea Aparecida Goncalves Nes ◽  
Heidi Holmen ◽  
Anette Winger ◽  
Hilde Thygesen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Home Based ◽  
Review Protocol

scholarly journals An assessment of the extent to which the contents of PROSPERO records meet the systematic review protocol reporting items in PRISMA-P

F1000Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 773
Author(s):  
Alison Booth ◽  
Alex S. Mitchell ◽  
Andrew Mott ◽  
Sophie James ◽  
Sarah Cockayne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Single Entry ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Source Of Information

Background: PROSPERO is an international prospective register for systematic review protocols. Many of the registrations are the only available source of information about planned methods. This study investigated the extent to which records in PROSPERO contained the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Methods: A random sample of 439 single entry PROSPERO records of reviews of health interventions registered in 2018 was identified. Using a piloted list of 19 PRISMA-P items, divided into 63 elements, two researchers independently assessed the registration records. Where the information was present or not applicable to the review, a score of 1 was assigned. Overall scores were calculated and comparisons made by stage of review at registration, whether or not a meta-analysis was planned and whether or not funding/sponsorship was reported. Results: Some key methodological details, such as eligibility criteria, were relatively frequently reported, but much of the information recommended in PRISMA-P was not stated in PROSPERO registrations. Considering the 19 items, the mean score was 4.8 (SD 1.8; median 4; range 2-11) and across all the assessed records only 25% (2081/8227) of the items were scored as reported. Considering the 63 elements, the mean score was 33.4 (SD 5.8; median 33; range 18-47) and overall, 53% (14,469/27,279) of the elements were assessed as reported. Reporting was more frequent for items required in PROSPERO than optional items. The planned comparisons showed no meaningful differences between groups. Conclusions: PROSPERO provides reviewers with the opportunity to be transparent in their planned methods and demonstrate efforts to reduce bias. However, where the PROSPERO record is the only available source of a priori reporting, there is a significant shortfall in the items reported, compared to those recommended. This presents challenges in interpretation for those wishing to assess the validity of the final review.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of complementary therapies for the management of symptom clusters in palliative care in pediatric oncology: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luís Carlos Lopes-Júnior ◽  
Isadora Rangel Urbano ◽  
Sara Isabel Pimentel de Carvalho Schuab ◽  
Raphael Manhães Pessanha ◽  
Gabriela Sylvestre Rosa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Complementary Therapies ◽  
Cannabis Sativa ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Symptom Clusters ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Pain Anxiety ◽  
Therapeutic Massage

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of complementary therapies in the management of symptom clusters in children and adolescents with cancer undergoing palliative care. Method: Systematic review guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, resorting to the databases MEDLINE, Web of Science, Central Cochrane, and PsycINFO. The identification, selection, inclusion, extraction, and methodological assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. Results: Five quasi-experiments met the eligibility criteria. The heterogeneous characteristics of the studies made meta-analysis impossible. Two studies used therapeutic massage, one used Reiki, one used boswellic acid, and one used Cannabis sativa; three of them (therapeutic massage and Reiki) presented statistically significant results for the management of the cluster pain-anxiety-worry-dyspnea. Most studies presented a moderate risk of bias as per ROBINS-I tool. Conclusion: Therapeutic massage and Reiki may be effective for the symptom clusters management, especially the pain-anxiety-worry-dyspnea cluster in children and adolescents undergoing palliative care.

scholarly journals The outcome of COVID-19 among the geriatric age group in African countries: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Degena Bahrey Tadesse ◽  
Shishay Wahdey ◽  
Melaku Negash ◽  
Ebud Ayele ◽  
Teklehaimanot Gereziher Haile ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Age Group ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Unpublished Studies ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Analysis Protocol

Abstract Background According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the outbreak of coronavirus disease in 2019 (COVID-19) has been declared as a pandemic and public health emergency that infected more than 5 million people worldwide at the time of writing this protocol. Strong evidence for the outcome of COVID-19 among the geriatric age group has not been published in Africa. Therefore, this protocol will be served as a guideline to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the outcome of COVID-19 among the geriatric age group in Africa. Methods Published and unpublished studies on the outcome of COVID-19 among the geriatric age group in Africa and written in any language will be included. Databases (PubMed / MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Google, EMBASE, Web of Science, Microsoft Academic, WHO COVID-19 database, Cochran Library, Africa Wide Knowledge, and Africa Index Medicus) from March to August 2020 will be searched. Two independent reviewers will select, screen, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. The proportion will be measured using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis will be conducted to manage heterogeneity. The presence of publication bias will be assessed using Egger’s test and visual inspection of the funnel plots. This systematic and meta-analysis review protocol will be reported per the PRISMA-P guidelines. Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will be expected to quantify the outcome of COVID-19 among the geriatric age group in Africa. Systematic review registration This protocol was submitted for registration with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) in April 2020 and accepted with the registration number: (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). CRD42020180600.

scholarly journals Pulmonary rehabilitation for COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol

Medwave ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (06) ◽  
pp. e8223-e8223
Author(s):  
Stefanie Arce Pardo ◽  
Shuheng Lai ◽  
Luis Ortiz-Muñoz ◽  
Francisca Verdugo-Paiva ◽  
Gabriel Rada
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Traditional Media ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Review Protocol

Objective This living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the evidence available on the role of pulmonary rehabilitation in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Design This is the protocol of a living systematic review. Data sources We will conduct searches in the L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that maps PICO questions to a repository maintained through regular searches in electronic databases, preprint servers, trial registries and other resources relevant to COVID-19. No date or language restrictions will be applied. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methods We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation as monotherapy or in combination with other interventions-versus sham or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Ethics and dissemination No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.

scholarly journals Development of a Systematic Review Protocol and a Scoping Review of Ultrasound-Induced Immune Effects in Peripheral Tumors

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Rix ◽  
Renée Girbig ◽  
Céline Porte ◽  
Wiltrud Lederle ◽  
Cathalijn Leenaars ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Selection Strategy ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Study Characteristics ◽  
Review Protocol

Abstract Purpose Publication numbers reporting that ultrasound can stimulate immune reactions in tumors steadily increase. However, the presented data are partially conflicting, and mechanisms are difficult to identify from single publications. These shortcomings can be addressed by a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature. As a first step, we here present the methodology and protocol for a systematic review to answer the following research question: Does ultrasound alter the immune reaction of peripheral solid tumors in humans and animals compared to control conditions without ultrasound? Procedures We designed a protocol to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis. The suitability of the protocol to detect and sort relevant literature was tested using a subset of publications. We extracted study characteristics, ultrasound parameters, and study outcomes to pre-evaluate the differences between publications and present the data as a scoping review. Results From 6532 publications detected by our preliminary literature search, 320 were selected for testing our systematic review protocol. Of the latter, 15 publications were eligible for data extraction. There, we found large differences between study characteristics (e.g., tumor type, age) and ultrasound settings (e.g., wavelength 0.5–9.5 MHz, acoustic pressure 0.0001–15,000 W/cm2). Finally, study outcomes included reports on cells of the innate (e.g., dendritic cells, macrophages) and adaptive immune system (e.g., CD8-/CD4-positive T cells). Conclusion We designed a protocol to identify relevant literature and perform a systematic review and meta-analysis. The differences between extracted features between publications show the necessity for a comprehensive search and selection strategy in the systematic review to get a complete overview of the literature. Meta-analyses of the extracted outcomes can then enable evidence-based conclusions.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of personal letters to healthcare professionals in changing clinical practice behaviours: A Systematic Review protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aikaterini Grimani ◽  
Louis Goffe ◽  
Mei Yee Tang ◽  
Fiona Beyer ◽  
Falko F. Sniehotta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Hand Search

Abstract Background: Letters are regularly sent by healthcare organisations to healthcare professionals to encourage them to take action, change practice or implement guidance. However, whether letters are an effective tool in delivering a change in clinical practice behaviour is currently uncertain. In addition, there are currently no evidence-based guidelines to support providers and health authorities with advice on how to formulate the communication, what information and behaviour change techniques to include in order to optimise the potential effect on the behaviour of the receivers. To address this research gap, we aim to inform such guidance through this systematic review.Methods/ Design: A systematic literature search of published and unpublished studies (the grey literature) in electronic databases will be conducted to identify studies that meet our inclusion criteria. The search will be conducted in five electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL. We will also conduct supplementary searches in Google Scholar, hand search relevant journals, and conduct backward and forward citation searching for included studies and relevant reviews. A systematic approach to searching, screening, reviewing and data extraction will be applied based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis. Titles, abstracts, full-texts for eligibility will be examined independently by researchers. The quality of the included studies will be assessed using quality assessment tool for studies with diverse design and Cochrane risk of bias tool. Disagreements will be resolved by a consensus procedure.Discussion: This review aims to provide comprehensive evidence of the effectiveness of personal letters to healthcare professionals in changing clinical practice behaviours. Health policy makers across government will benefit from being able to increase compliance in clinical settings by applying theories of behaviour to design of policy communications. The synthesized findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020167674

Efficacy of physiotherapy for spinal kyphosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol v1

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiki Saimon ◽  
Takashi Kitagawa ◽  
Yuichi Abe ◽  
Ah-Cheng Goh
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Life Expectancy ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Spinal Column ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Analysis Protocol

Kyphosis of the spinal column has been reported to increase with age. With the increased in life expectancy and a greater proportion of the elderly, it is predicted that the number of patients with spinal kyphosis will also increase in the future. Physiotherapy is a one of the Conservative treatments for spinal kyphosis. But efficacy of physiotherapy for spinal kyphosis is not clear. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the benefits and harms of physiotherapy for elderly patients with spinal kyphosis. We used a systematic review protocol template (dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.biqrkdv6). We followed the Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P, 2015) for preparing this protocol.

scholarly journals Protocol for Systematic Review in Privacy and Security in Telehealth: Best Practices for Healthcare Professionals

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 15-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie J.M. Watzlaf ◽  
Dilhari R. DeAlmeida ◽  
Leming Zhou ◽  
Linda M. Hartman
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Federal Regulations ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Privacy And Security ◽  
Review Protocol

Healthcare professionals engaged in telehealth are faced with complex US federal regulations (e.g., HIPAA/HITECH) and could benefit from the guidance provided by best practices in Privacy and Security (P&S). This article describes a systematic review protocol to address this need. The protocol described herein uses the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). The PRISMA-P contains 17 items that are considered essential, as well as minimum components to include in systematic reviews. PICOS (participants, interventions, comparisons, outcome(s) and study design of the systematic review) are also relevant to the development of best practices in P&S in telehealth systems. A systematic process can best determine what information should be included and how this information should be retrieved, condensed, analyzed, organized, and disseminated.

scholarly journals An assessment of the extent to which the contents of PROSPERO records meet the systematic review protocol reporting items in PRISMA-P

F1000Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 773
Author(s):  
Alison Booth ◽  
Alex S. Mitchell ◽  
Andrew Mott ◽  
Sophie James ◽  
Sarah Cockayne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Single Entry ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Source Of Information

Background: PROSPERO is an international prospective register for systematic review protocols. Many of the registrations are the only available source of information about planned methods. This study investigated the extent to which records in PROSPERO contained the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Methods: A random sample of 439 single entry PROSPERO records of reviews of health interventions registered in 2018 was identified. Using a piloted list of 19 PRISMA-P items, divided into 63 elements, two researchers independently assessed the registration records. Where the information was present or not applicable to the review, a score of 1 was assigned. Overall scores were calculated and comparisons made by stage of review at registration, whether or not a meta-analysis was planned and whether or not funding/sponsorship was reported. Results: Some key methodological details, such as eligibility criteria, were relatively frequently reported, but much of the information recommended in PRISMA-P was not stated in PROSPERO registrations. Considering the 19 items, the mean score was 4.8 (SD 1.8; median 4; range 2-11) and across all the assessed records only 25% (2081/8227) of the items were scored as reported. Considering the 63 elements, the mean score was 33.4 (SD 5.8; median 33; range 18-47) and overall, 53% (14,469/27,279) of the elements were assessed as reported. Reporting was more frequent for items required in PROSPERO than optional items. The planned comparisons showed no meaningful differences between groups. Conclusions: PROSPERO provides reviewers with the opportunity to be transparent in their planned methods and demonstrate efforts to reduce bias. However, where the PROSPERO record is the only available source of a priori reporting, there is a significant shortfall in the items reported, compared to those recommended. This presents challenges in interpretation for those wishing to assess the validity of the final review.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document