BackgroundMuch of what we understand about the design of healthcare systems to support care of the dying comes from our experiences with providing palliative care for dying cancer patients. It is increasingly recognized that in addition to cancer, high quality end of life care should be an integral part of care that is provided for those with other advancing chronic life-limiting conditions. A “palliative approach” has been articulated as one way of conceptualizing this care. However, there is a lack of conceptual clarity regarding the essential characteristics of a palliative approach to care. The goal of this research was to delineate the key characteristics of a palliative approach found in the empiric literature in order to establish conceptual clarity.MethodsWe conducted a knowledge synthesis of empirical peer-reviewed literature. Search terms pertaining to “palliative care” and “chronic life-limiting conditions” were identified. A comprehensive database search of 11 research databases for the intersection of these terms yielded 190,204 documents. A subsequent computer-assisted approach using statistical predictive classification methods was used to identify relevant documents, resulting in a final yield of 91 studies. Narrative synthesis methods and thematic analysis were used to then identify and conceptualize key characteristics of a palliative approach.ResultsThe following three overarching themes were conceptualized to delineate a palliative approach: (1) upstream orientation towards the needs of people who have life-limiting conditions and their families, (2) adaptation of palliative care knowledge and expertise, (3) operationalization of a palliative approach through integration into systems and models of care that do not specialize in palliative care.ConclusionOur findings provide much needed conceptual clarity regarding a palliative approach. Such clarity is of fundamental importance for the development of healthcare systems that facilitate the integration of a palliative approach in the care of people who have chronic life-limiting conditions.

Background and Objectives Our aim was to create a “storyline” that provides empirical explanation of stakeholders’ perspectives underlying the use of patient- and family-reported outcome and experience measures to inform continuity across transitions in care for frail older adults and their family caregivers living at home. Research Design and Methods We conducted a meta-narrative synthesis to explore stakeholder perspectives pertaining to use of patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) across micro (patients, family caregivers, and healthcare providers), meso (organizational managers/executives/programs), and macro (decision-/policy-makers) levels in healthcare. Systematic searches identified 9,942 citations of which 40 were included based on full-text screening. Results PROMs and PREMS (54 PROMs; 4 PREMs; 1 with PROM and PREM elements; 6 unspecified PROMs) were rarely used to inform continuity across transitions of care and were typically used independently, rarely together (n = 3). Two overarching traditions motivated stakeholders’ use. The first significant motivation by diverse stakeholders to use PROMs and PREMs was the desire to restore/support independence and care at home, predominantly at a micro-level. The second motivation to using PROMs and PREMs was to evaluate health services, including cost-effectiveness of programs and hospital discharge (planning); this focus was rarely at a macro-level and more often split between micro- and meso-levels of healthcare. Discussion and Implications The motivations underlying stakeholders’ use of these tools were distinct, yet synergistic between the goals of person/family-centered care and healthcare system-level goals aimed at efficient use of health services. There is a missed opportunity here for PROMs and PREMs to be used together to inform continuity across transitions of care.

Background Substantial literature has highlighted the importance of patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs, respectively) to collect clinically relevant information to better understand and address what matters to patients. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence about how healthcare providers implement individual-level PROMs and PREMs data into daily practice. Methods This mixed methods systematic review protocol describes the design of our synthesis of the peer-reviewed research evidence (i.e., qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods), systematic reviews, organizational implementation projects, expert opinion, and grey literature. Keyword synonyms for “PROMs,” PREMs,” and “implementation” will be used to search eight databases (i.e., MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Embase, SPORTDiscus, Evidence-based Medicine Reviews, and ProQuest (Dissertation and Theses)) with limiters of English from 2009 onwards. Study selection criteria include implementation at the point-of-care by healthcare providers in any practice setting. Eligible studies will be critically appraised using validated tools (e.g., Joanna Briggs Institute). Guided by the review questions, data extraction and synthesis will occur simultaneously to identify biographical information and methodological characteristics as well as classify study findings related to implementation processes and strategies. As part of the narrative synthesis approach, two frameworks will be utilized: (a) Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify influential factors of PROMs and PREMs implementation and (b) Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) to illicit strategies. Data management will be undertaken using NVivo 12TM. Discussion Data from PROMs and PREMs are critical to adopt a person-centered approach to healthcare. Findings from this review will guide subsequent phases of a larger project that includes interviews and a consensus-building forum with end users to create guidelines for implementing PROMs and PREMs at the point of care. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020182904.

No abstract

Aims To determine the impact of endurance training (ET) interventions on left ventricular (LV) chamber size, wall thickness, and mass in healthy adults. Methods Electronic databases including CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, Cochrane library, and EBM Reviews were searched up to January 4th, 2022. Criteria for inclusion were healthy females and/or males (>18y), ET intervention for ≥2wk, and studies reporting pre- and post-training LV structural parameters. A random-effects meta-analysis with heterogeneity, publication bias, and sensitivity analysis was used to determine effects of ET on LV mass (LVM), and diastolic measures of interventricular septum thickness (IVSd), posterior wall thickness (PWTd), and LV diameter (LVDd). Meta-regression was performed on mediating factors (age, sex, training protocols) to assess their effects on LV structure. Results Eighty-two studies met inclusion criteria (n = 1908; 19-82y, 33% female). There was a significant increase in LVM, PWTd, IVSd, and LVDd following ET (SMD = 0.444, 95%CI:0.361, 0.527; p < 0.001, SMD = 0.234, 95%CI:0.159, 0.309; p < 0.001; SMD = 0.237, 95%CI:0.159, 0.316; p < 0.001; SMD = 0.249, 95%CI:0.173, 0.324; p < 0.001, respectively). Trained status, training type and age were the only mediating factors for change in LVM, where previously trained, mixed-type training, young (18-35 y) and middle-aged (36-55 y) individuals had the greatest change compared to untrained, interval-type training, and older individuals (>55 y). A significant increase in wall thickness was observed in males, with a similar augmentation of LVDd in males and females. Trained individuals elicited an increase in all LV structures and ET involving mixed-type training and rowing and swimming modalities conferred the greatest increase in PWTd and LVDd. Conclusion LV structure is significantly increased following ET. Males, young and trained individuals, and ET interventions involving mixed training regimes elicit the greatest changes in LV structure.