首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Medical Directors Association >Who Should Deliver Primary Care in Long-term Care Facilities to Optimize Resident Outcomes? A Systematic Review
【24h】

Who Should Deliver Primary Care in Long-term Care Facilities to Optimize Resident Outcomes? A Systematic Review

机译:谁应该在长期护理设施中提供初级保健,以优化居民结果? 系统评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

ObjectiveAcross the world, health care for residents in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) is provided by a range of different professionals, and there is no consensus on which professional group(s) deliver the best outcomes for residents. The objective of this review is to investigate how the health outcomes of older adults in LTCFs vary according to which professional group(s) provides first-line medical care. DesignA systematic review and narrative synthesis were performed. Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus were searched for studies from high-income countries, of any design, published after 2000. Quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias and ROBINS-I tools. The exposure of interest was the professional group(s) involved in the delivery of first-line primary care. Setting and participantsOlder adults living in LTCFs. MeasuresThe principal outcomes were unplanned transfer to hospital, prescribing quality, and mortality. ResultsSearches identified 10,532 citations after removing duplicates. Twenty-six publications (across 24 studies) met the inclusion criteria. A narrative synthesis was conducted of the 20 experimental and 4 observational studies, involving approximately 98,000 residents. Seven studies were set in the USA, 6 in Australia, 3 in Canada, 2 in New Zealand, and 6 in European countries. Interventions were varied, complex and multi-faceted. Nineteen interventional studies, including 4 randomized trials, involved the addition of a specialist practitioner, either a doctor or nurse, to supplement usual primary care. The most commonly reported outcomes were unplanned hospital transfer and prescribing quality. Interventions based on specialist nurses were associated with reductions in unplanned hospital transfers in 10 out of 12 publications. There was no consistent evidence of a positive impact of specialist doctor interventions on unplanned hospital transfers. However, specialist doctors were associated with improvements in prescribing quality in all 7 relevant studies. There was a paucity of evidence on the impact of specialist nurse interventions on prescribing, and of specialist practitioners on mortality, and no improvements were reported. ConclusionsAddition of specialist doctors or nurses to the first-line medical team has the potential to improve key health outcomes for residents in LTCFs.
机译:ObjectiveAcross世界,长期护理设施(LTCFS)的居民的医疗保健由一系列不同的专业人士提供,并且没有共识,专业组为居民提供最佳成果。本综述的目的是调查LTCFS在LTCFS中老年人的健康结果如何根据哪个专业集团提供一线医疗保健。设计了设计系统审查和叙事合成。在2000年后发布的任何设计,搜索了受控试验的Medline,Embase,Cochrane中央登记册和Scopus的学习,使用了任何设计。使用偏见和罗宾斯 - I工具的Cochrane风险评估了质量。兴趣的曝光是涉及交付一线初级保健的专业群体。生活在LTCFS的成人和参与者的成年人。 MeasureSthe主要结果是意外转移到医院,处方质量和死亡率。结果审查在删除重复后确定了10,532个引文。二十六种出版物(跨24项研究)达到了纳入标准。叙事合成是对20个实验和4项观测研究进行的,涉及约98,000名居民。七项研究在美国,澳大利亚6名,加拿大3,在新西兰2,以及6名欧洲国家。干预变化,复杂和多面。 19项介入研究,包括4项随机试验,涉及添加专业从业者,无论是医生还是护士,都会补充通常的初级保健。最常见的结果是无计划的医院转移和规定质量。基于专业护士的干预措施与12个出版物中的10个出版物中的无计划医院转移的减少有关。没有一致的证据证明专业医生干预对计划生育的医院转移的积极影响。但是,专家医生与所有7项相关研究中的处方质量的改进有关。有没有关于专业护士干预对处方的影响的证据,以及专业从业者对死亡率的影响,没有报告任何改进。结论专家医生或护士向一线医疗团队有可能改善LTCFS中居民的重点健康结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号