Suppr超能文献

在初级医疗保健中实施腰痛护理模式的实施过程和结果的范围综述。

A scoping review on implementation processes and outcomes of models of care for low back pain in primary healthcare.

机构信息

Comprehensive Health Research Center (CHRC), National School of Public Health, NOVA University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.

Physiotherapy Department, School of Health Care, Polytechnic Institute of Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Nov 8;24(1):1365. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11764-9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

To address the societal burden of low back pain (LBP), several health systems have adopted Models of Care (MoCs). These evidence-informed models aim for consistent care and outcomes. However, real-world applications vary, with each setting presenting unique challenges and nuances in the primary healthcare landscape. This scoping review aims to synthesize the available evidence regarding the use of implementation theories, models or frameworks, context-specific factors, implementation strategies and outcomes reported in MoCs targeting LBP in primary healthcare.

METHODS

MEDLINE(Pubmed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature databases were searched. Eligible records included MoCs for adults with LBP in primary healthcare. Two reviewers independently extracted data concerning patient-related, system-related and implementation-related outcomes. The implementation processes, including guiding theories, models or frameworks, barriers and facilitators to implementation and implementation strategies were also extracted. The data were analysed through a descriptive qualitative content analysis and synthesized via both quantitative and qualitative approaches.

RESULTS

Eleven MoCs (n = 29 studies) were included. Implementation outcomes were assessed in 6 MoCs through quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approaches. Acceptability and appropriateness were the most reported outcomes. Only 5 MoCs reported underlying theories, models, or frameworks. Context-specific factors influencing implementation were identified in 3 MoCs. Common strategies included training providers, developing educational materials, and changing record systems. Notably, only one MoC included a structured multifaceted implementation strategy aligned with the evaluation of patient, organizational and implementation outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation processes and outcomes of the MoCs were not adequately reported and lacked sufficient theoretical support. As a result, conclusions about the success of implementation cannot be drawn, as the strategies employed were not aligned with the outcomes. This study highlights the need for theoretical guidance in the development and implementation of MoCs for the management of LBP in primary healthcare.

REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework Registries ( https://osf.io/rsd8x ).

摘要

背景

为了应对腰痛(LBP)带来的社会负担,许多卫生系统已经采用了护理模式(MoC)。这些基于证据的模式旨在实现一致的护理和结果。然而,实际应用存在差异,每个设置在初级保健领域都存在独特的挑战和细微差别。本范围综述旨在综合有关在初级保健中针对 LBP 使用实施理论、模型或框架、具体背景因素、实施策略和结果的现有证据。

方法

MEDLINE(PubMed)、EMBASE、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库、PEDro、Scopus、Web of Science 和灰色文献数据库进行了检索。合格记录包括针对初级保健中成人腰痛的 MoC。两名审查员独立提取与患者相关、系统相关和实施相关结果有关的数据。还提取了实施过程,包括指导理论、模型或框架、实施的障碍和促进因素以及实施策略。通过描述性定性内容分析对数据进行分析,并通过定量和定性方法进行综合。

结果

纳入了 11 项 MoC(n=29 项研究)。有 6 项 MoC 通过定量、定性和混合方法评估了实施结果。可接受性和适宜性是报告最多的结果。只有 5 项 MoC 报告了基础理论、模型或框架。有 3 项 MoC 确定了影响实施的具体背景因素。常见的策略包括培训提供者、开发教育材料和改变记录系统。值得注意的是,只有一项 MoC 包括了与患者、组织和实施结果评估一致的结构化多方面实施策略。

结论

MoC 的实施过程和结果没有得到充分报告,缺乏足够的理论支持。因此,不能得出关于实施成功的结论,因为所采用的策略与结果不一致。本研究强调了在初级保健中管理 LBP 方面,MoC 的制定和实施需要理论指导。

注册

开放科学框架注册处(https://osf.io/rsd8x)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8193/11549756/0c27c5a29fbf/12913_2024_11764_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验