Search

Background: Sleep disturbance is a prevalent condition among people living with dementia (PLwD) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Its assessment and management within primary care is complex because of the comorbidities, older age, and cognitive impairment typical of this patient group. Aim: To explore how primary care clinicians assess, understand, and manage sleep disturbance for PLwD or MCI; if and why such initiatives work; and how people and their carers experience sleep disturbance and its treatment. Design and setting: A realist review of existing literature conducted in 2022. Method: Six bibliographic databases were searched. Context–mechanism–outcome configurations (CMOCs) were developed and refined. Results: In total, 60 records were included from 1869 retrieved hits and 19 CMOCs were developed. Low awareness of and confidence in the treatment of sleep disturbance among primary care clinicians and patients, combined with time and resource constraints, meant that identifying sleep disturbance was difficult and not prioritised. Medication was perceived by clinicians and patients as the primary management tool, resulting in inappropriate or long-term prescription. Rigid nursing routines in care homes were reportedly not conducive to good-quality sleep. Conclusion: In primary care, sleep disturbance among PLwD or MCI is not adequately addressed. Over-reliance on medication, underutilisation of non-pharmacological strategies, and inflexible care home routines were reported as a result of low confidence in sleep management and resource constraints. This does not constitute effective and person-centred care. Future work should consider ways to tailor the assessment and management of sleep disturbance to the needs of individuals and their informal carers without overstretching services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medication review (MR) is the systematic assessment of a patient's medications for safety and effectiveness by a healthcare professional. The language used to describe MR activity, such as stopped medicine and increased dose, should be consistent across studies to assist researchers compare how different services operate and identify their mechanism of impact. Aim: To develop an international taxonomy of standardized terms and activity definitions related to medication reviews. Method: This was a three-stage Delphi-based consensus study with international medication review experts. A systematic review provided MR activity terms for the survey. Experts rated their consensus on each activity term and its definition on a Likert scale and provided written feedback. The consensus was 75% panel agreement. At each stage, consensus elements were retained, and feedback was used to revise definitions. Results: Seven experts were recruited for the study (response rate 15.2%) from four countries: the United Kingdom (n = 4), New Zealand (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), and Malaysia (n = 1). The following terms achieved consensus: the term Medication as a descriptor for MR terms; discontinue medication, start medication, dose increase, dose decrease, dosage form change, and medication safety and efficacy monitor to describe MR activity; Educate to describe the delivery of healthcare professionals and patients/carers education. Conclusion: Standardized medication review activity terms and definitions have been selected for universal adoption in all future MR research to facilitate a meaningful comparison of process evaluations within different settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) is difficulty manipulating a food bolus from the mouth to the throat. Up to 70% of older adults develop OD; however, it is unmanaged in primary care, leading to avoidable hospitalisation., Objective: This behavioural science realist review aimed to develop programme theories to describe how interventions facilitate primary care healthcare professionals (HCPs) to proactively manage OD., Methods: We developed initial programme theories (IPTs) inductively using the expertise of stakeholders and deductively using the theoretical domains framework (TDF). Databases were searched to identify evidence regarding contexts, behavioural mechanisms and outcomes related to proactive management of OD and comparative behaviours which offer transferrable learning. IPTs were tested with the evidence to confirm, refine or refute, to produce final programme theories., Results: 36 sources of evidence were included. Five final programme theories were generated explaining how primary care HCPs can be facilitated to proactively manage OD: (1) OD education and training, (2) checklists with OD signs and symptoms, (3) incorporating OD identification into existing workflow, (4) making HCPs aware that older adults and carers expect them to manage OD and (5) raising awareness of the adverse outcomes of OD., Conclusion: The five programme theories provide the behavioural mechanisms by which an intervention may facilitate primary care HCPs to proactively manage OD. Through the programme theories' linkage to the TDF, behaviour change techniques (BCTs) mapped to the relevant TDF domain can be selected for an intervention. Operationalisation of selected BCTs into a coherent intervention package should be undertaken using codesign methodology., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42022320327., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Less than one third of research evidence is translated into policy or practice. Knowledge translation requires effective dissemination, adoption and finally implementation. These three stages are equally important, however, existing knowledge translation models and frameworks provide little and disparate information about the steps and activities required for effective dissemination., Objective: This study aimed to empirically develop a consolidated framework of evidence-based steps and activities for disseminating research evidence., Methods: We identified models and frameworks from a scoping review and dissemination and implementation webtool. We synthesised them into a prototype dissemination framework. Models and frameworks were eligible to inform steps in our framework if they fulfilled at least one of three elements of dissemination: intending to generate awareness of a message, incorporates targeting an audience: tailoring communication. An initial coding framework was created to organise data into dissemination steps. Drawing on 'co-approach' principles, authors of the included models and frameworks (dissemination experts) and health service researchers (end users) were invited to test and refine the prototype framework at a workshop., Results: From 48 models and frameworks reviewed, only 32 fulfilled one or more of the three dissemination elements. The initial coding framework, upon refinement, yielded the Guide to Disseminating Research (GuiDiR) comprising five steps. 1) Identify target audiences and dissemination partners. 2) Engage with dissemination partners. 3) Identify barriers and enablers to dissemination. 4) Create dissemination messages. 5) Disseminate and evaluate. Multiple activities were identified for each step and no single model or framework represents all steps and activities in GuiDiR., Conclusions: GuiDiR unifies dissemination components from knowledge translation models and frameworks and harmonises language into a format accessible to non-experts. It outlines for researchers, funders and practitioners the expected structure of dissemination and details the activities for executing an evidence-based dissemination strategy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)