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.
Detecting the effectiveness of behavioral interventions to reduce infant night-waking requires valid sleep measures. Although viewed as an objective measure, actigraphy has overestimated night-waking. Sleep diaries are criticized for only documenting night-waking with infant crying. To support potential outcome measure validity, we examined differences between sleep diaries and actigraphy in detecting night-waking and sleep duration. We recruited 5.5 to 8-month-old infants for a behavioral sleep intervention trial conducted from 2009 to 2011. Intervention (sleep education and support) and control groups (safety education and support) collected infant diary and actigraphy data for 5 days. We compared night-time sleep actigraphy with diary data at baseline (194 cases), and 6 weeks (166 cases) and 24 weeks post-education (118 cases). We hypothesized numbers of wakes and wakes of ≥20 min would be higher and longest sleep time and total sleep time shorter by actigraphy compared with diaries. Using paired t-tests, there were significantly more actigraphy night wakes than diary wakes at baseline (t = 29.14, df = 193, p < 0.001), 6 weeks (t = 23.99, df = 165, p < 0.001), and 24 weeks (t = 22.01, df = 117, p < 0.001); and significantly more night wakes of ≥20 min by actigraphy than diary at baseline (t = 5.03, df = 183, p < 0.001), and 24 weeks (t = 2.19, df = 107, p < 0.05), but not 6 weeks (t = 1.37, df = 156, n.s.). Longest sleep duration was significantly higher by diary than actigraphy at baseline (t = 14.71, df = 186, p < 0.001), 6 weeks (t = 7.94, df = 158, p < 0.001), and 24 weeks (t = 17.18, df = 114, p < 0.001). Night sleep duration was significantly higher by diary than actigraphy at baseline (t = 9.46, df = 185, p < 0.001), 6 weeks (t = 13.34, df = 158, p < 0.001), and 24 weeks (t = 13.48, df = 114, p < 0.001). Discrepancies in actigraphy and diary data may indicate accurate actigraphy recording of movement but not sleep given active infant sleep and self-soothing.
Background: Challenges with engaging in postnatal physical activity can negatively affect the health of new mothers and their families. This study investigated women’s physical activity decision-making processes and strategies to support their physical activity as part of a healthy postpartum transition. Methods: Thirty healthy women with infants aged 2.5-12 months completed 3-day activity diaries and an individual interview. Using Glaser and Charmaz’s grounded theory methodology, the core category, reconciling relationships with physical activity, was derived, which explained women’s processes of postnatal physical activity decision-making. Results: Through reconciling relationships with physical activity, women discerned the types of physical activity they were comfortable pursuing at various points in the postpartum transition. Based on the meaning physical activity held for participants and their views about risks, supports, and resources, women gauged their capacity and the workability of their physical activity desires. Most women were uncertain of their capacity (physical, emotional) to return to physical activity and viewed the achievement of several or all of their desired physical activities as unworkable. Only a third fully pursued the desirable physical activities they viewed as important for their well-being. Women adjusted the strategies they used to achieve physical activity when their expectations of capacity and workability did not align with their experiences. Some women lacked access to resources or supportive messaging about postpartum physical activity and downgraded their physical activity pursuit after negative physical or childcare experiences. Conclusions: Women can benefit from discussions about physiological birth recovery and navigating community and peer resources to support physical activity access and the safe return to physical activity following birth.
Background Challenges with engaging in postnatal physical activity can negatively affect the health of women and their families. This study investigated women’s physical activity decision-making processes and strategies to support their physical activity as part of a healthy postpartum transition. Methods Thirty healthy women with infants aged 2.5–12 months completed 3-day activity diaries and an individual interview. Using Glaser and Charmaz’s grounded theory methodology, the core category, reconciling relationships with physical activity, was constructed, which explained women’s processes of postnatal physical activity decision-making. Results Through reconciling relationships with physical activity, women discerned the types of physical activity they were comfortable pursuing at various points in the postpartum transition. Based on the meaning physical activity held for participants and their views about risks, supports, and resources, women gauged their capacity and the workability of their physical activity desires. Most women were uncertain of their capacity (physical, emotional) to return to physical activity and viewed the achievement of several or all of their desired physical activities as unworkable. Only a small group of women fully pursued the desirable physical activities they viewed as important for their well-being. Women adjusted the strategies they used to achieve physical activity when their expectations of capacity and workability did not align with their experiences. Some women lacked access to resources or supportive messaging about postpartum physical activity and downgraded their physical activity pursuit after negative personal physical or childcare experiences. Conclusions Women can benefit from discussions about physiological birth recovery and navigating community and peer resources to support physical activity access and the safe return to physical activity following birth.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.