HRB open research最新文献

Background: Sláintecare aims to introduce universal healthcare in Ireland. The COVID-19 pandemic poses both challenges and opportunities to this process. This study explored the impact of COVID-19 on aspects of Irish healthcare during the first nine months of the pandemic and considers the implications for Sláintecare implementation.

Methods: Secondary analysis was undertaken on publicly available data on three key domains of the Irish healthcare system: primary care, community-based allied healthcare, and hospitals. Descriptive statistics were computed using Microsoft Excel 2016.

Results: Up to March 2021, 3.76 million COVID-19 tests were performed by Ireland's public healthcare system, 2.48 million (66.0%) of which were referred from the community. General practitioners delivered 2.31 million telephone triages of COVID-19 symptoms, peaking in December 2020 when 416,607 consultations occurred. Patient numbers across eight allied healthcare specialties fell by 35.1% versus previous years, with the greatest reductions seen in speech and language therapy (49.0%) and audiology (46.1%). Hospital waiting lists increased from 729,937 to 869,676 (or by 19.1%) from January 2019 to January 2021. In January 2021, 629,919 patients awaited a first outpatient clinic appointment, with 170,983 (27.1%) waiting longer than 18 months. The largest outpatient lists were observed in orthopaedic surgery (n=77,257); ear, nose and throat surgery (n=68,073); and ophthalmology (n=47,075). The proportion of patients waiting more than 12 months for a day-case gastrointestinal endoscopy rose from 6.0% in January 2020 to 19.0% in January 2021.

Conclusions: Healthcare activity has been significantly disrupted by COVID-19, leading to increased wait times and greater barriers to healthcare access during the pandemic. Yet, Ireland's health system responses also revealed strong willingness and ability to adapt and to implement novel solutions for healthcare delivery, rapidly and at scale. This has demonstrated what is achievable under Sláintecare and provides a unique opportunity to 'build back better' towards sustainable recovery.

Background: Scientific publications have been growing exponentially, contributing to an oversaturated information environment. Quantifying a research output's impact and reach cannot be solely measured by traditional metrics like citation counts as these have a lag time and are largely focused on an academic audience. There is increasing recognition to consider 'alternative metrics' or altmetrics to measure more immediate and broader impacts of research. Better understanding of altmetrics can help researchers better navigate evolving information environments and changing appetites for different types of research.

Objectives: Our study aims to: 1) analyse the amount and medium of Altmetric coverage of health research produced by Irish organisations (2017 - 2023), identifying changes over time and 2) investigate differences in the amount of coverage between clinical areas (e.g., nutrition vs. neurology).

Methods: Using Altmetric institutional access, we will gather data on research outputs published 1 January 2017 through 31 December 2023 from active Irish organisations with Research Organisation Registry (ROR) IDs. Outputs will be deduplicated and stratified by their Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification relating to ≥1 field of health research: Biological Sciences, Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Chemical Sciences, Health Sciences, and Psychology. We will clean data using R and perform descriptive analyses, establishing counts and frequencies of coverage by clinical area and medium (e.g., traditional news, X, etc.); data will be plotted on a yearly and quarterly basis where appropriate.

Results and conclusions: Improved understanding of one's information environment can help researchers better navigate their local landscapes and identify pathways for more effective communication to the public. All R code will be made available open-source, allowing researchers to adapt it to evaluate their local landscapes.

Background: Neurocognitive disorders (NCDs), including delirium, cognitive impairment, or dementia are prevalent in up to 39% of older adults in acute care, particularly older trauma patients. Undiagnosed NCDs result in poor outcomes, such as increased incidence of depressive symptoms, longer length of stay, and mortality.

Objective: This study aims to identify the diagnostic test accuracy of screening tools for the detection of NCDs in older trauma patients in acute settings.

Design: Systematic review protocol.

Literature search: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library) will be searched for journal articles. Search terms related to NCDs, delirium and cognitive screening tools, and diagnostic accuracy will be included.

Study selection criteria: Cross-sectional, prospective, or retrospective cohort studies of adults aged ≥60 post-trauma, in an acute setting, will be included where the study aimed to validate a screening tool for detection of 1) delirium or 2) cognitive impairment, or dementia against a reference standard of a clinical decision, based on standardised diagnostic criteria or a validated tool.

Data synthesis: Two review authors will conduct study selection, data extraction, and appraisal. Data will be extracted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) checklist. Studies will be assessed for methodological quality by two independent review authors using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Narrative summaries will be generated describing risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability. Quantitative synthesis of study findings will be conducted.

Conclusion: This systematic review will aim to identify screening tools with the best diagnostic accuracy for detection of 1) delirium and 2) cognitive impairment or dementia in adults aged ≥60 post-trauma in acute care settings. Results will inform clinical practice to enhance the probability of patients with NCDs receiving appropriate care and management.

Registration: PROSPERO https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024518730 (11/03/2024).

Background: This study aims to understand and explain the influence of contextual factors on the implementation of Intentional Rounding in acute hospitals using the realist synthesis methodology.Falls of hospital admitted patients are one of the most frequent concerns for patient safety in the acute hospital environment. The reasons why people fall are complex. International guidelines recommend a multifactorial assessment and effective prevention and management of identified risk factors in order to reduce the number of falls. Intentional Rounding (IR) is one approach for delivering this. IR is an umbrella term, understood as a structured process whereby nurses or care staff carry out regular checks with individual patients using a standardised protocol to address such issues as positioning, pain, personal needs and placement of possessions.

Methods: This study will use realist synthesis to understand what works, for whom, in what circumstances, and in what settings. Realist synthesis is a theory driven interpretive approach to evidence synthesis. It is our intention to analyse IR as an intervention, which aims to enhance patient care and safety in hospital settings. The synthesis forms part of a larger implementation study examining interventions that reduce the number of falls that occur in hospitals. Search terms will include intentional rounding, purposeful rounding, comfort rounding and hourly rounding and will encompass search terms beyond IR and falls rates to avoid limiting the synthesis. This synthesis will conform to the RAMESES (realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis group) publication and reporting quality standards.

Conclusions: The findings will inform the next phase of an implementation study on IR in acute hospital settings, to address evidence informed enablers and barriers to IR. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and through presentations.

Background: Mallet finger injuries are a frequent cause of hospital attendance, being the fifth most common injury in the body. They are therefore a frequent cause of hospital visits. To date, these injuries have primarily been managed using generic splints. As a generic splint provides a generic fit, patients who receive these are not provided with a custom splint experience. As the size and fit of these splints are not bespoke to the patient's anatomy, patients may not always find the fit comfortable and may find complying with these splints difficult at times. However, an opportunity is developing within healthcare where custom splinting can be obtained for some using Three-D (3D) printing. The rationale for this review is to gain an understanding of the research that has been conducted on 3D printing of mallet injury splints.

Objective: The objective of this scoping review is to map the current literature on 3D printing associated with mallet finger injury.

Methods: The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews will be used throughout along with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Two researchers will search the databases that will include CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, EbscoHost, Medline/Pubmed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The search will include a hand search of sources falling outside the chosen databases. Screen titles, abstracts, and full-text articles will be reviewed by two researchers independently using Rayaan software. The data extracted from the literature will first be presented in a tabulated chart followed by a narrative synthesis.

Registration: The protocol was registered on 6 ^th September 2023, with the Open Science Framework. Registration DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FSJPK.

Background: In paediatric palliative and bereavement care, providing comprehensive support that extends beyond medical treatment to address the emotional and psychosocial needs of children and their families is essential. Memory-making interventions play a critical role in capturing cherished moments and fostering emotional resilience. However, widespread consensus on the foundation and scope of memory-making interventions for children and young people remains sparse. This review aims to identify, appraise, and synthesise the evidence on memory-making interventions for children and young people with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions and their family members receiving palliative or bereavement care.

Methods: This systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). A systematic search will be undertaken from January 1, 1985, to February 27, 2024, across the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL (EBSCO), PsycINFO (EBSCO), Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Studies across diverse research designs that examine children (0-19 years) with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions undergoing memory-making interventions with psychosocial or other outcomes will be included. Screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal will be performed by two independent reviewers, with a third reviewer resolving discrepancies. Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for conducting mixed methods systematic reviews will be used to inform the data analysis and synthesis process.

Conclusions: This review will provide critical insights into the existing evidence base on memory-making interventions in paediatric palliative and bereavement care, highlighting psychosocial and other impacts, implementation factors, and evidence quality. By identifying best practices and gaps in knowledge, this evidence review may inform future research and intervention design, or adaptation, and contribute to the enhancement of healthcare for children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions and their families as well as families in bereavement.

Registration: This review was registered in PROSPERO, the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42024521388; 18/03/2024).