Siew Hwa Lee

Effectiveness of mHealth interventions for maternal, newborn and child health in low- and middle-income countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective To assess the effectiveness of mHealth interventions for maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) in low– and middle–income countries (LMIC). Methods 16 online international databases were searched to identify studies evaluating the impact of mHealth interventions on MNCH outcomes in LMIC, between January 1990 and May 2014. Comparable studies were included in a random–effects meta–analysis. Findings Of 8593 unique references screened after de–duplication, 15 research articles and two conference abstracts met inclusion criteria, including 12 intervention and three observational studies. Only two studies were graded at low risk of bias. Only one study demonstrated an improvement in morbidity or mortality, specifically decreased risk of perinatal death in children of mothers who received SMS support during pregnancy, compared with routine prenatal care. Meta–analysis of three studies on infant feeding showed that prenatal interventions using SMS/cell phone (vs routine care) improved rates of breastfeeding (BF) within one hour after birth (odds ratio (OR) 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27–2.75, I2 = 80.9%) and exclusive BF for three/four months (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.26–2.50, I2 = 52.8%) and for six months (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.46–3.68, I2 = 0.0%). Included studies encompassed interventions designed for health information delivery (n = 6); reminders (n = 3); communication (n = 2); data collection (n = 2); test result turnaround (n = 2); peer group support (n = 2) and psychological intervention (n = 1). Conclusions Most studies of mHealth for MNCH in LMIC are of poor methodological quality and few have evaluated impacts on patient outcomes. Improvements in intermediate outcomes have nevertheless been reported in many studies and there is modest evidence that interventions delivered via SMS messaging can improve infant feeding. Ambiguous descriptions of interventions and their mechanisms of impact present difficulties for interpretation and replication. Rigorous studies with potential to offer clearer evidence are underway.

Metastatic spinal cord compression: a review of practice and care

AIM AND OBJECTIVES The aim of this review was to address: (1) How is spinal stability assessed? (2) What is the role of bracing/should braces be used? (3) When is it safe to mobilise the patient? (4) What position should the patient be nursed in? BACKGROUND Controversy surrounds the care for patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). There is some evidence to indicate that care for patients with MSCC is based on individual clinician preference rather than evidence-based guidelines which has been shown to cause delays and discrepancies in patient treatment. DESIGN A structured literature review to synthesise the available evidence about the management of MSCC. METHODS The following databases were searched: Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Systematic Reviews Database, SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network), NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence), AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and BNI (British Nursing Index). Publications were selected from the past 10 years. The search yielded a total of 1057 hits, 755 abstracts were screened, and 73 articles were retrieved and examined. Thirty-five articles were included. RESULTS The findings identified a gap and evidence relating to spinal stability, bracing, patient mobilisation, and positioning is limited and may be inconclusive. It is important for patients with a poor prognosis that their preferences and quality of life are considered. CONCLUSION Currently, the evidence base to underpin care is limited, and further research in this area is necessary for patients and healthcare professionals alike. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE Patients who suffer from MSCC suffer numerous physical, psychological and social issues. Because of lack of consensus, the current guidelines to inform clinical decision-making of professional staff are of limited benefit.

Correction: Assessing the facilitators and barriers of interdisciplinary team working in primary care using normalisation process theory: An integrative review

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177026.].

Metastatic spinal cord compression

AIM AND OBJECTIVES The aim of this review was to address: (1) How is spinal stability assessed? (2) What is the role of bracing/should braces be used? (3) When is it safe to mobilise the patient? (4) What position should the patient be nursed in? BACKGROUND Controversy surrounds the care for patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). There is some evidence to indicate that care for patients with MSCC is based on individual clinician preference rather than evidence-based guidelines which has been shown to cause delays and discrepancies in patient treatment. DESIGN A structured literature review to synthesise the available evidence about the management of MSCC. METHODS The following databases were searched: Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Systematic Reviews Database, SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network), NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence), AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and BNI (British Nursing Index). Publications were selected from the past 10 years. The search yielded a total of 1057 hits, 755 abstracts were screened, and 73 articles were retrieved and examined. Thirty-five articles were included. RESULTS The findings identified a gap and evidence relating to spinal stability, bracing, patient mobilisation, and positioning is limited and may be inconclusive. It is important for patients with a poor prognosis that their preferences and quality of life are considered. CONCLUSION Currently, the evidence base to underpin care is limited, and further research in this area is necessary for patients and healthcare professionals alike. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE Patients who suffer from MSCC suffer numerous physical, psychological and social issues. Because of lack of consensus, the current guidelines to inform clinical decision-making of professional staff are of limited benefit.

Metastatic spinal cord compression: a review of practice and care: Metastatic spinal cord compression

AIM AND OBJECTIVES The aim of this review was to address: (1) How is spinal stability assessed? (2) What is the role of bracing/should braces be used? (3) When is it safe to mobilise the patient? (4) What position should the patient be nursed in? BACKGROUND Controversy surrounds the care for patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). There is some evidence to indicate that care for patients with MSCC is based on individual clinician preference rather than evidence-based guidelines which has been shown to cause delays and discrepancies in patient treatment. DESIGN A structured literature review to synthesise the available evidence about the management of MSCC. METHODS The following databases were searched: Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Systematic Reviews Database, SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network), NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence), AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and BNI (British Nursing Index). Publications were selected from the past 10 years. The search yielded a total of 1057 hits, 755 abstracts were screened, and 73 articles were retrieved and examined. Thirty-five articles were included. RESULTS The findings identified a gap and evidence relating to spinal stability, bracing, patient mobilisation, and positioning is limited and may be inconclusive. It is important for patients with a poor prognosis that their preferences and quality of life are considered. CONCLUSION Currently, the evidence base to underpin care is limited, and further research in this area is necessary for patients and healthcare professionals alike. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE Patients who suffer from MSCC suffer numerous physical, psychological and social issues. Because of lack of consensus, the current guidelines to inform clinical decision-making of professional staff are of limited benefit.