0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Understanding the complexity of barriers and facilitators to adherence to oral nutritional supplements among patients with malnutrition: a systematic mixed-studies review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The aim of this systematic mixed-studies review is to summarise barriers/facilitators to adherence to and/or consumption of oral nutritional supplements (ONS) among patients with disease-related malnutrition. In March 2022, the Cochrane CENTRAL, PUBMED, PsycINFO (Ovid) and CINAHL were searched for articles with various study designs, published since 2000. Articles were identified on the basis of ‘population’ (patients ≥18 years with malnutrition/at nutritional risk), ‘intervention’ (ONS with ≥2 macronutrients and micronutrients), ‘comparison’ (any comparator/no comparator) and ‘outcome’ (factors affecting adherence or consumption) criteria. A sequential exploratory synthesis was conducted: first, a thematic synthesis was performed identifying barriers/facilitators; and second, the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were used to support these findings. The five WHO dimensions of adherence guided the analysis. Study inclusion, data extraction, analysis and risk-of-bias assessment (MMAT 2018) were carried out independently by two researchers. From 21 835 screened articles, 171 were included with 42% RCTs and 20% qualitative studies. The two major populations were patients with malignancies (34%) and older adults (35%). In total, fifty-nine barriers/facilitators were identified. Patients’ health status, motivation, product tolerance and satisfaction as well as well-functioning healthcare routines and support were factors impacting ONS consumption. Few barriers/facilitators ( n = 13) were investigated in RCTs. Two of those were serving a small ONS volume and integrating ONS into ward routines. Given the complexity of ONS adherence, non-adherence to ONS should be addressed using a holistic approach. More studies are needed to investigate the effect of different approaches to increase adherence to ONS.

          Related collections

          Most cited references205

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

          Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions

            Background Improving the design and implementation of evidence-based practice depends on successful behaviour change interventions. This requires an appropriate method for characterising interventions and linking them to an analysis of the targeted behaviour. There exists a plethora of frameworks of behaviour change interventions, but it is not clear how well they serve this purpose. This paper evaluates these frameworks, and develops and evaluates a new framework aimed at overcoming their limitations. Methods A systematic search of electronic databases and consultation with behaviour change experts were used to identify frameworks of behaviour change interventions. These were evaluated according to three criteria: comprehensiveness, coherence, and a clear link to an overarching model of behaviour. A new framework was developed to meet these criteria. The reliability with which it could be applied was examined in two domains of behaviour change: tobacco control and obesity. Results Nineteen frameworks were identified covering nine intervention functions and seven policy categories that could enable those interventions. None of the frameworks reviewed covered the full range of intervention functions or policies, and only a minority met the criteria of coherence or linkage to a model of behaviour. At the centre of a proposed new framework is a 'behaviour system' involving three essential conditions: capability, opportunity, and motivation (what we term the 'COM-B system'). This forms the hub of a 'behaviour change wheel' (BCW) around which are positioned the nine intervention functions aimed at addressing deficits in one or more of these conditions; around this are placed seven categories of policy that could enable those interventions to occur. The BCW was used reliably to characterise interventions within the English Department of Health's 2010 tobacco control strategy and the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence's guidance on reducing obesity. Conclusions Interventions and policies to change behaviour can be usefully characterised by means of a BCW comprising: a 'behaviour system' at the hub, encircled by intervention functions and then by policy categories. Research is needed to establish how far the BCW can lead to more efficient design of effective interventions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

              The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Nutrition Research Reviews
                Nutr. Res. Rev.
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                0954-4224
                1475-2700
                October 09 2024
                : 1-21
                Article
                10.1017/S0954422424000192
                353e037f-1e5a-4618-9dce-e06531f33444
                © 2024

                Free to read

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article