Review article: Strategies to improve emergency department care for adults living with disability: A systematic review.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Bronwyn Newman, Colleen Cheek, Lieke Richardson, Donna Gillies, Karen Hutchinson, Elizabeth Austin, Margaret Murphy, Luke Testa, Christina Rojas, Louise Raggett, Amanda Dominello, Kylie Smith, Robyn Clay-Williams
{"title":"Review article: Strategies to improve emergency department care for adults living with disability: A systematic review.","authors":"Bronwyn Newman, Colleen Cheek, Lieke Richardson, Donna Gillies, Karen Hutchinson, Elizabeth Austin, Margaret Murphy, Luke Testa, Christina Rojas, Louise Raggett, Amanda Dominello, Kylie Smith, Robyn Clay-Williams","doi":"10.1111/1742-6723.14500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Equitable access means that timely, sensitive and respectful treatment is offered to all people. Adults with disability access ED care more frequently than the general population. However, in Australia and internationally, people with disability experience poorer healthcare access and outcomes than the general population. There is acknowledgement that ED environments and processes of care could be better designed to promote equitable access, so as not to further disadvantage, disable and create vulnerability. This systematic review aimed to locate and describe evaluated strategies implemented to improve care for people with disability (aged 18-65 years) in the ED. Four databases were searched from inception to June 2024. 1936 peer-reviewed papers were reviewed by pairs of independent reviewers. Four studies met our inclusion criteria, demonstrating the limited peer-reviewed literature reporting on evaluated strategies to improve ED care for adults aged 18-65 years. Three studies focused on the needs of people with intellectual disability, and one created a specific treatment pathway for people experiencing status epilepticus. No studies evaluated across patient experience, patient outcomes, system performance and staff experience, with limited evaluation of patient outcomes and system performance measures. We have referenced helpful resources published elsewhere and drawn from our previous reviews of ED care to provide guidance for the development and evaluation of targeted initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":11604,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.14500","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Equitable access means that timely, sensitive and respectful treatment is offered to all people. Adults with disability access ED care more frequently than the general population. However, in Australia and internationally, people with disability experience poorer healthcare access and outcomes than the general population. There is acknowledgement that ED environments and processes of care could be better designed to promote equitable access, so as not to further disadvantage, disable and create vulnerability. This systematic review aimed to locate and describe evaluated strategies implemented to improve care for people with disability (aged 18-65 years) in the ED. Four databases were searched from inception to June 2024. 1936 peer-reviewed papers were reviewed by pairs of independent reviewers. Four studies met our inclusion criteria, demonstrating the limited peer-reviewed literature reporting on evaluated strategies to improve ED care for adults aged 18-65 years. Three studies focused on the needs of people with intellectual disability, and one created a specific treatment pathway for people experiencing status epilepticus. No studies evaluated across patient experience, patient outcomes, system performance and staff experience, with limited evaluation of patient outcomes and system performance measures. We have referenced helpful resources published elsewhere and drawn from our previous reviews of ED care to provide guidance for the development and evaluation of targeted initiatives.

评论文章:改善急诊科对成年残疾人护理的策略:系统综述。
公平就医是指为所有人提供及时、敏感和受尊重的治疗。与普通人相比,成年残疾人获得急诊室医疗服务的频率更高。然而,在澳大利亚和国际上,残障人士获得医疗服务的机会和结果都比普通人要少。人们认识到,急诊室的环境和护理流程可以设计得更好,以促进公平就医,从而避免使残疾人处于更加不利的地位、丧失能力并造成脆弱性。本系统性综述旨在查找并描述为改善急诊室对残疾人(18-65 岁)的护理而实施的评估策略。我们检索了从开始到 2024 年 6 月的四个数据库。1936 篇经同行评审的论文由一对独立评审员进行了评审。有四项研究符合我们的纳入标准,这表明同行评审文献中关于改善 18-65 岁成人急诊室护理的评估策略的报道非常有限。三项研究关注智障人士的需求,一项研究为癫痫状态患者创建了特定的治疗路径。没有研究对患者体验、患者疗效、系统性能和员工体验进行评估,对患者疗效和系统性能指标的评估也很有限。我们参考了其他地方发表的有用资源,并借鉴了我们之前对急诊室护理的回顾,为制定和评估有针对性的措施提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Emergency Medicine Australasia
Emergency Medicine Australasia 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
13.00%
发文量
217
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Emergency Medicine Australasia is the official journal of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) and the Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine (ASEM), and publishes original articles dealing with all aspects of clinical practice, research, education and experiences in emergency medicine. Original articles are published under the following sections: Original Research, Paediatric Emergency Medicine, Disaster Medicine, Education and Training, Ethics, International Emergency Medicine, Management and Quality, Medicolegal Matters, Prehospital Care, Public Health, Rural and Remote Care, Technology, Toxicology and Trauma. Accepted papers become the copyright of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信