Search

Introduction: This scoping review investigates the extent and nature of existing evidence on the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and related mechanisms of engagement and challenges in issues of caring for older persons through digital technologies. We map research and practice gaps, contributing factors and best practices in NGOs. The rising use of digital technology in health care and the role that NGOs have in supporting older people in this context is relevant to nurses and service development leaders, particularly in the context of a rapidly changing care in the 21 st century., Methods: A three-stage systematic and comprehensive search strategy based on the JBI methodology for scoping reviews was employed across multiple databases and grey literature sources., Results: In this review, 8,348 abstracts were retrieved. After deduplication, 7,099 titles and abstracts were reviewed. A total of 263 publications were selected for full-text review and 50 included for analysis. NGOs use digital tools to directly engage older adults in programs (e. g., information delivery) and indirectly to collaborate with other organizations (e.g., training programs) to promote digital inclusion. Factors such as individual capabilities, trust and access, technological factors (accessibility and user-friendliness of technology), and socio-cultural and system-wide factors affect how NGOs engage with older adults., Conclusion: Our findings are summarized in the key domains: key organizations, mode of engagement, interorganizational process and digital technology are discussed and offer current insights into the varied engagement of NGOs with older people and its challenges concerning technology. Many interrelated factors, along with barriers and facilitators that influence older persons' engagement with technology, have been identified., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

Purpose: To explore whether and how eHealth solutions support the dignity of healthcare professionals and patients in palliative care contexts., Method: This qualitative study used phenomenographic analysis involving four focus group interviews, with healthcare professionals who provide palliative care to older people., Results: Analysis revealed four categories of views on working with eHealth in hierarchical order: Safeguarding the patient by documenting-eHealth is a grain of support, Treated as less worthy by authorities-double standards, Distrust in the eHealth solution-when the "solution" presents a danger; and Patient first-personal contact with patients endows more dignity than eHealth . The ability to have up-to-date patient information was considered crucial when caring for vulnerable, dying patients. eHealth solutions were perceived as essential technological support, but also as unreliable, even dangerous, lacking patient information, with critical information potentially missing or overlooked. This caused distrust in eHealth, introduced unease at work, and challenged healthcare professionals' identities, leading to embodied discomfort and feeling of a lack of dignity., Conclusion: The healthcare professionals perceived work with eHealth solutions as challenging their sense of dignity, and therefore affecting their ability to provide dignified care for the patients. However, healthcare professionals managed to provide dignified palliative care by focusing on patient first.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the risk of stillbirth, perinatal and neonatal mortality in immigrant women compared to native-origin women in host countries. Methods: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was conducted. Relevant studies were identified using a thorough literature search and their quality was appraised. The analysis of heterogeneous data was carried out using the random effects model and publication bias was assessed using the Harbord-test. Also, the pooled odds ratio of events was calculated through the DerSimonian and Laird, and inverse variance methods. Results: In the search process 45 studies were retrieved consisting of 8,419,435 immigrant women and 40,113,869 native-origin women. The risk of stillbirth (Pooled OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.22-1.50), perinatal mortality (Pooled OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.35-1.68), and neonatal mortality (Pooled OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.00-1.19) in the immigrant women were significantly higher than the native-origin women in host countries. According to the sensitivity analyses, all results were highly consistent with the main data analysis results. Conclusion: The immigrant women compared to the native-origin women had the higher risks of stillbirth, perinatal and neonatal mortality. Healthcare providers and policy makers should improve the provision of maternal and neonatal healthcare for the immigrant population., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Behboudi-Gandevani, Bidhendi-Yarandi, Panahi, Mardani, Gåre Kymre, Paal and Vaismoradi.)