Disparities in the Clinical Provision of Deep Brain Stimulation: A Systematic Scoping Review and Grounded-Theory Qualitative Analysis.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Wellington Chang, Talia Ganz, Sara Kang, Kacey Hu, Catherine Mark, Adam Frank, Brian Lee, Darrin Lee, R Bernard Coley, Rachel Carmen Ceasar, Xenos Mason
{"title":"Disparities in the Clinical Provision of Deep Brain Stimulation: A Systematic Scoping Review and Grounded-Theory Qualitative Analysis.","authors":"Wellington Chang, Talia Ganz, Sara Kang, Kacey Hu, Catherine Mark, Adam Frank, Brian Lee, Darrin Lee, R Bernard Coley, Rachel Carmen Ceasar, Xenos Mason","doi":"10.1002/mdc3.70132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) has been an established treatment for movement disorders since its FDA approval in 1996. However, disparities in DBS care, particularly concerning race, gender, socioeconomic status, and geography, remain a significant concern globally.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic scoping review and grounded theory qualitative analysis aimed to synthesize existing research on worldwide disparities in DBS provision and to develop theoretical solutions to enhance equity and improve the quality of research in DBS disparities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search identified 46 studies, which were critically appraised for quality and analyzed using grounded theory methods to extract core conceptual categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We characterized three principles of DBS disparities: intersectionality, reciprocal interactivity and influence of patients and providers, and the interposition of simultaneous barriers; together these highlight the role of individual, systemic, and structural factors in generating DBS disparities. Racial minorities, women, socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals, and patients in certain geographic regions were consistently found to have reduced access to DBS. Gaps in the research include a calcified research infrastructure, insufficient attention to cultural and societal contexts, and reliance on conjecture without empirical support.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We propose a multi-level approach to address DBS disparities, including reciprocal education between patients and clinicians, enhanced screening and referral networks, and policy reforms at institutional and governmental levels. These findings will facilitate further hypothesis-driven research and foster more equitable access to DBS globally.</p>","PeriodicalId":19029,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders Clinical Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Movement Disorders Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mdc3.70132","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) has been an established treatment for movement disorders since its FDA approval in 1996. However, disparities in DBS care, particularly concerning race, gender, socioeconomic status, and geography, remain a significant concern globally.

Objectives: This systematic scoping review and grounded theory qualitative analysis aimed to synthesize existing research on worldwide disparities in DBS provision and to develop theoretical solutions to enhance equity and improve the quality of research in DBS disparities.

Methods: A systematic search identified 46 studies, which were critically appraised for quality and analyzed using grounded theory methods to extract core conceptual categories.

Results: We characterized three principles of DBS disparities: intersectionality, reciprocal interactivity and influence of patients and providers, and the interposition of simultaneous barriers; together these highlight the role of individual, systemic, and structural factors in generating DBS disparities. Racial minorities, women, socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals, and patients in certain geographic regions were consistently found to have reduced access to DBS. Gaps in the research include a calcified research infrastructure, insufficient attention to cultural and societal contexts, and reliance on conjecture without empirical support.

Conclusions: We propose a multi-level approach to address DBS disparities, including reciprocal education between patients and clinicians, enhanced screening and referral networks, and policy reforms at institutional and governmental levels. These findings will facilitate further hypothesis-driven research and foster more equitable access to DBS globally.

临床提供深部脑刺激的差异:系统的范围审查和基于理论的定性分析。
背景:深部脑刺激(DBS)自1996年获得FDA批准以来一直是一种治疗运动障碍的有效方法。然而,在DBS治疗方面的差异,特别是在种族、性别、社会经济地位和地理方面的差异,仍然是全球关注的重大问题。目的:通过系统的范围综述和基于理论的定性分析,旨在综合现有的关于DBS提供的全球差异的研究,并制定理论解决方案,以提高DBS差异研究的公平性和质量。方法:系统检索了46项研究,对其质量进行了批判性评价,并使用扎根理论方法进行了分析,以提取核心概念类别。结果:我们描述了DBS差异的三个原则:交叉性、患者和提供者的相互互动和影响、同时障碍的介入;这些因素共同突出了个人、系统和结构性因素在造成星展银行差异中的作用。少数民族、妇女、社会经济弱势群体和某些地理区域的患者接受DBS治疗的机会一直较少。研究中的差距包括僵化的研究基础设施,对文化和社会背景的关注不足,以及在没有经验支持的情况下依赖推测。结论:我们提出了一种多层次的方法来解决DBS差异,包括患者和临床医生之间的相互教育,加强筛查和转诊网络,以及机构和政府层面的政策改革。这些发现将促进进一步的假设驱动型研究,并促进全球更公平地获得星展银行服务。
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
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
218
期刊介绍: Movement Disorders Clinical Practice- is an online-only journal committed to publishing high quality peer reviewed articles related to clinical aspects of movement disorders which broadly include phenomenology (interesting case/case series/rarities), investigative (for e.g- genetics, imaging), translational (phenotype-genotype or other) and treatment aspects (clinical guidelines, diagnostic and treatment algorithms)
×
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