Tal Krasovsky, Patrice L Weiss, Liat Gafni-Lachter, Rachel Kizony, Naomi Gefen
{"title":"为儿童和青少年提供联合医疗服务的混合方法:范围界定审查。","authors":"Tal Krasovsky, Patrice L Weiss, Liat Gafni-Lachter, Rachel Kizony, Naomi Gefen","doi":"10.1186/s12984-024-01401-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hybrid models that integrate both in-person and remote health services are increasingly recognized as a promising approach. Nevertheless, research that defines and characterizes these models in children and young people is scarce and essential for establishing guidelines for implementation of hybrid allied health services. This scoping review evaluates four key aspects of hybrid allied health services in children and young people: 1. definitions, 2. service characteristics, 3. outcome measures, and 4. results of hybrid allied health services.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six databases were searched: Medline (Ovid), Embase, CINHAL, Psycinfo, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Of the 9,868 studies potentially meeting the inclusion criteria, 49 studies focused on children and young people. Following full-text review, n = 21 studies were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Terminology used for hybrid allied health services varied across studies which targeted diverse clinical populations and varied in study design, type and frequency of remote and in-person treatments. Over 75% of cases used custom-written software, limiting scalability. All interventions started in-person, possibly to establish a therapeutic alliance and solve technological issues. Most hybrid allied health services (67%) were in mental health, while only a minority involved physical, occupational or speech therapy. The most common outcomes were feasibility and satisfaction, but tools used to measure them were inconsistent. Although 57% of studies demonstrated effectiveness of hybrid allied health services, none measured cost-effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Despite the potential of hybrid allied health services for children and young people, the literature remains at a preliminary stage. Standardization of definitions and outcome measures, and clearer reporting of service characteristics and results would likely promote consolidation of hybrid allied health services in children and young people into clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":16384,"journal":{"name":"Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11264746/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hybrid approaches to allied health services for children and young people: a scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Tal Krasovsky, Patrice L Weiss, Liat Gafni-Lachter, Rachel Kizony, Naomi Gefen\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12984-024-01401-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hybrid models that integrate both in-person and remote health services are increasingly recognized as a promising approach. Nevertheless, research that defines and characterizes these models in children and young people is scarce and essential for establishing guidelines for implementation of hybrid allied health services. This scoping review evaluates four key aspects of hybrid allied health services in children and young people: 1. definitions, 2. service characteristics, 3. outcome measures, and 4. results of hybrid allied health services.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six databases were searched: Medline (Ovid), Embase, CINHAL, Psycinfo, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Of the 9,868 studies potentially meeting the inclusion criteria, 49 studies focused on children and young people. Following full-text review, n = 21 studies were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Terminology used for hybrid allied health services varied across studies which targeted diverse clinical populations and varied in study design, type and frequency of remote and in-person treatments. Over 75% of cases used custom-written software, limiting scalability. All interventions started in-person, possibly to establish a therapeutic alliance and solve technological issues. Most hybrid allied health services (67%) were in mental health, while only a minority involved physical, occupational or speech therapy. The most common outcomes were feasibility and satisfaction, but tools used to measure them were inconsistent. Although 57% of studies demonstrated effectiveness of hybrid allied health services, none measured cost-effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Despite the potential of hybrid allied health services for children and young people, the literature remains at a preliminary stage. Standardization of definitions and outcome measures, and clearer reporting of service characteristics and results would likely promote consolidation of hybrid allied health services in children and young people into clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11264746/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-024-01401-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-024-01401-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:将现场和远程医疗服务结合起来的混合模式越来越被认为是一种很有前景的方法。然而,对这些模式在儿童和青少年中的定义和特点的研究却很少,而这些研究对于制定混合联合医疗服务的实施指南至关重要。本范围综述对儿童和青少年混合联合医疗服务的四个关键方面进行了评估:1.定义;2.服务特点;3.结果测量;4.混合联合医疗服务的结果:搜索了六个数据库:方法:检索了六个数据库:Medline (Ovid)、Embase、CINHAL、Psycinfo、Cochrane CENTRAL 和 Web of Science。在可能符合纳入标准的 9,868 项研究中,有 49 项研究侧重于儿童和青少年。经过全文审阅,共纳入 21 项研究:混合联合医疗服务的术语在不同的研究中各不相同,这些研究针对不同的临床人群,在研究设计、远程和面对面治疗的类型和频率方面也各不相同。超过 75% 的案例使用定制软件,限制了可扩展性。所有干预都是从面对面开始的,这可能是为了建立治疗联盟和解决技术问题。大多数混合专职医疗服务(67%)是心理健康方面的,只有少数涉及物理、职业或语言治疗。最常见的结果是可行性和满意度,但用于衡量这些结果的工具并不一致。虽然有 57% 的研究证明了混合专职医疗服务的有效性,但没有一项研究对成本效益进行了衡量:讨论:尽管为儿童和青少年提供混合联合医疗服务很有潜力,但相关文献仍处于初步阶段。定义和结果测量的标准化,以及对服务特点和结果更清晰的报告,将有可能促进儿童和青少年混合专职医疗服务在临床实践中的巩固。
Hybrid approaches to allied health services for children and young people: a scoping review.
Background: Hybrid models that integrate both in-person and remote health services are increasingly recognized as a promising approach. Nevertheless, research that defines and characterizes these models in children and young people is scarce and essential for establishing guidelines for implementation of hybrid allied health services. This scoping review evaluates four key aspects of hybrid allied health services in children and young people: 1. definitions, 2. service characteristics, 3. outcome measures, and 4. results of hybrid allied health services.
Methods: Six databases were searched: Medline (Ovid), Embase, CINHAL, Psycinfo, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Of the 9,868 studies potentially meeting the inclusion criteria, 49 studies focused on children and young people. Following full-text review, n = 21 studies were included.
Results: Terminology used for hybrid allied health services varied across studies which targeted diverse clinical populations and varied in study design, type and frequency of remote and in-person treatments. Over 75% of cases used custom-written software, limiting scalability. All interventions started in-person, possibly to establish a therapeutic alliance and solve technological issues. Most hybrid allied health services (67%) were in mental health, while only a minority involved physical, occupational or speech therapy. The most common outcomes were feasibility and satisfaction, but tools used to measure them were inconsistent. Although 57% of studies demonstrated effectiveness of hybrid allied health services, none measured cost-effectiveness.
Discussion: Despite the potential of hybrid allied health services for children and young people, the literature remains at a preliminary stage. Standardization of definitions and outcome measures, and clearer reporting of service characteristics and results would likely promote consolidation of hybrid allied health services in children and young people into clinical practice.
期刊介绍:
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation considers manuscripts on all aspects of research that result from cross-fertilization of the fields of neuroscience, biomedical engineering, and physical medicine & rehabilitation.