Silke Kuske

Diabetes-related information-seeking behaviour: a systematic review

BackgroundInformation-seeking behaviour is necessary to improve knowledge on diabetes therapy and complications. Combined with other self-management skills and autonomous handling of the disease, it is essential for achieving treatment targets. However, a systematic review addressing this topic is lacking. The aims of this systematic review were to identify and analyse existing knowledge of information-seeking behaviour: (1) types information-seeking behaviour, (2) information sources, (3) the content of searched information, and (4) associated variables that may affect information-seeking behaviour.MethodsThe systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) requirements. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CCMed, ERIC, Journals@OVID, Deutsches Ärzteblatt and Karlsruher virtueller Katalog (KvK) databases were searched. Publications dealing with information-seeking behaviour of people with diabetes mellitus published up to June 2015 were included. A forward citation tracking was performed in September 2016 and June 2017. Additionally, an update of the two main databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL) was conducted, considering studies published up to July 2017. Studies published in languages other than English or German were excluded, as well as letters, short reports, editorials, comments and discussion papers. A study selection and the critical appraisal of the selected studies were performed independently by two reviewers. A third reviewer was consulted if any disagreement was found. Data extraction and content analysis were performed using selected dimensions of Wilson’s ‘model of information behaviour’.ResultsTwenty-six studies were included. Five ‘types of information-seeking behaviour’ were identified, e.g. passive and active search. The ‘Internet’ and ‘healthcare professionals’ were the most frequently reported sources. ‘Diet’, ‘complications’, ‘exercise’ and ‘medications and pharmacological interactions’ were the most frequently identified content of information. Seven main categories including associated variables were identified, e.g. ‘socioeconomic’, ‘duration of DM’, and ‘lifestyle’.ConclusionThe systematic review provides a valuable overview of available knowledge on the information-seeking behaviour of people with diabetes mellitus, although there are only a few studies. There was a high heterogeneity regarding the research question, design, methods and participants. Although the Internet is often used to seek information, health professionals still play an important role in supporting their patients’ information-seeking behaviour. Specific needs of people with diabetes must be taken into consideration.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016037312

Berichts- und Lernsysteme in der stationären Langzeitpflege auf dem Weg zur Implementierung

Background: There is a need for discussing influencing factors of the implementation of critical incident reporting systems in long term care. Objective of this publication is to describe the value of Reporting and Learning Systems and to discuss concrete recommendations for implementation based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Influencing factors of successful implementation: A successful implementation is related to a systematic approach and several success factors. The following factors of implementation after analysis with Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research are relevant: (i) a standardised and straightforward design, (ii) the consideration of external stimuli, (iii) the development of a positive organisational and safety culture that facilitates implementation by providing resources, (iv) the consideration of needs, knowledge and individual processes of change, and (v) repeated evaluation of the implementation process. Outlook: A particular focus should be applied to visible interventions. Safety culture will be reinforced by enabling personalized reports. However, today it is needed to face current barriers. It is recommended to develop and to test instruments that measure implementation and to investigate the success of sustainable implementation.

Drug-based pain management in people with dementia after hip or pelvic fractures: a systematic review protocol

BackgroundStudies show that people with dementia do not receive the same amount of analgesia after a hip or pelvic fracture compared to those without cognitive impairment. However, there is no systematic review that shows to what extent and how drug-based pain management is performed for people with dementia following a hip or pelvic fracture. The aim of this systematic review is to identify studies addressing drug-based pain management for people with dementia who have had a hip or pelvic fracture for which they had either an operation or conservative treatment. We will analyse to what extent and how the drug-based pain treatment for people with dementia is performed across all settings and how it is assessed in the studies.MethodsThe development of this systematic review protocol was guided by the PRISMA-P requirements, which will be taken into consideration during the review procedure. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Knowledge and ScienceDirect will be searched, using keywords such as “analgesia”, “dementia”, “cognitive impairment”, “pain treatment”, “hip fracture” or “pelvic fracture”. Publications published up to January 2016 will be included. The data extraction and a content analysis will be carried out systematically, followed by a critical appraisal.DiscussionThis review will provide a valuable overview on the current evidence on drug-based pain management for PwD in all settings who were conservatively treated after a hip or pelvic fracture. The review may expose a need to enhance pain management for PwD. It may also provide motivation for healthcare providers and policymakers to give this topic their attention and to facilitate further research by considering aspects of care transitions in all settings.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016037309

Education and health professionals training programs for people with type 2 diabetes: a review of quality criteria

OBJECTIVE To contribute to the development of a set of quality criteria for patient education and health professionals training that could be applied in European countries. METHODS Literature review quality criteria, pre-selection based on a comparison of the criteria, peer group and expert based selection of the criteria. RESULTS 14 quality criteria were selected: goals, rationale, target group, setting, scheduling of the education/training sessions, environmental requirements, qualification of the trainers/educators, core components of the educator/trainers role, curriculum, education methods, education didactics, monitoring of the effectiveness and quality of the program, implementation level and source of funding. DISCUSSION A set of preliminary quality criteria for patient education and health professionals training was developed, which could be applied in European countries.

Information needs in people with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to identify and analyse currently available knowledge on information needs of people with diabetes mellitus, also considering possible differences between subgroups and associated factors.MethodsTwelve databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched up until June 2015. Publications that addressed self-reported information needs of people with diabetes mellitus were included. Each study was assessed by using critical appraisal tools, e.g. from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Extraction and content analysis were performed systematically.ResultsIn total, 1993 publications were identified and 26 were finally included. Nine main categories of information needs were identified, including ‘treatment-process’, ‘course of disease’, ‘abnormalities of glucose metabolism’ and ‘diabetes through the life cycle’. Differences between patient subgroups, such as type of diabetes or age, were sparsely analysed. Some studies analysed associations between information needs and factors such as participation preferences or information seeking. They found, for example, that information needs on social support or life tasks were associated with information seeking in Internet forums.ConclusionInformation needs in people with diabetes mellitus, appear to be high, yet poorly investigated. Research is needed regarding differences between diverse diabetes populations, including gender aspects or changes in information needs during the disease course.Systematic review registrationThe review protocol has been registered at Prospero (CRD42015029610).

Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma: protocol for a systematic review

Introduction Survivors of polytrauma experience long-term and short-term burden that influences their lives. The patients’ view of relevant short-term and long-term outcomes should be captured in instruments that measure quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after a polytrauma. The aim of this systematic review is to (1) collect instruments that assess PROs (quality of life, social participation and activities of daily living) during follow-up after polytrauma, (2) describe the instruments’ application (eg, duration of period of follow-up) and (3) investigate other relevant PROs that are also assessed in the included studies (pain, depression, anxiety and cognitive function). Methods and analysis The systematic review protocol is developed in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the trials registers ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform will be searched. Keywords, for example, ‘polytrauma’, ‘multiple trauma’, ‘quality of life’, ‘activities of daily living’ or ‘pain’ will be used. Publications published between January 2005 and the most recent date (currently: August 2016) will be included. In order to present the latest possible results, an update of the search is conducted before publication. The data extraction and a content analysis will be carried out systematically. A critical appraisal will be performed. Ethics and dissemination Formal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed publication. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017060825.

Quality indicators for diabetes prevention programs in health care targeted at people at high risk

OBJECTIVE Type 2 diabetes can be efficiently prevented by lifestyle intervention provided for people at high diabetes risk. The aim of this paper was to conduct a literature search on existing quality indicators for type 2 diabetes prevention and to collate and present a set of indicators that could be applied in European countries with different health care systems and cultures. METHODS Scientific and grey literature was searched for relevant studies using electronic databases. We also hand searched previous systematic reviews and reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS The only publication identified was the report presenting the results from the IMAGE project. The IMAGE indicators were used as the basis for the proposed indicators. CONCLUSIONS Publications on quality indicators of diabetes prevention programmes are scarce. The quality indicators presented here are a first step toward the definition of a core set of European indicators to monitor and improve the quality of diabetes prevention.

Health promotion interventions in type 2 diabetes

AIM To present the most common quality criteria in health promotion interventions in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted to identify review articles, health technology assessments and policy reports of evaluated health promotion interventions in T2DM. A descriptive analysis of study characteristics and evaluation criteria are presented. RESULTS Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings indicate that the most common health promotion interventions used in T2DM are initiatives targeting health care professionals. The main ambition of the programs was to increase the collaboration between health care professionals and patients, and between health care centres, program managers and community stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS This investigation extends our knowledge of the most common health promotion interventions in T2DM and which structure, process and outcome measurements that are reported in such interventions. Future research could usefully explore how the effectiveness of multicomponent and complex interventions may be evaluated and extend the association of these factors into other settings and in relation to other lifestyle related chronic diseases.