Health care service interventions to improve the health care outcomes of hospitalised patients with extreme obesity: An evidence and gap map.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Caz Hales, Rebecca Chrystall, Mona Jeffreys, Ruth Weatherall, Anne M Haase
{"title":"Health care service interventions to improve the health care outcomes of hospitalised patients with extreme obesity: An evidence and gap map.","authors":"Caz Hales, Rebecca Chrystall, Mona Jeffreys, Ruth Weatherall, Anne M Haase","doi":"10.1177/13558196251349448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectivesWe set out to produce an evidence and gap map (EGM) on health care service interventions to improve health care outcomes for hospitalised patients with extreme obesity. Hospitalised patients with extreme obesity have poorer health care outcomes compared to normal weight patients. We also considered how hospital services can be coordinated and delivered to meet the care needs of patients with extreme obesity.MethodsA standardised five-stage EGM method was used to develop an intervention-outcome framework; identify current evidence; critically appraise the quality of evidence, extract, code, and summarise data in relation to the EGM objectives; and create a visualisation map to present findings. EPPI Reviewer Web software was used to generate an interactive EGM. The intervention-outcome framework was developed from internationally recognised health system performance and quality standards. This framework consisted of nine intervention (specialist workforce, special care pathways, assessment tools, equipment, moving and handling, specialist care areas, education, care bundles/packages, patient mobility) and six outcome categories (safety, effectiveness, efficiency, timely access, patient experience, health equity). Inclusion criteria were systematic reviews and primary studies that reported on health service interventions aimed to improve health care outcomes for patients with extreme obesity in the inpatient setting. Thirteen electronic databases were searched to identify studies for eligibility. The original searches were completed between November 2021 and March 2022. A repeat search was completed in August 2023.ResultsOf the 64,574 studies retrieved, 247 met eligibility criteria. Most of the excluded studies specifically related to bariatric weight loss surgical procedures or interventional techniques which could not be more broadly generalised to health care service provision. Of the 247 studies included, most studies (210; 85%) involved special care pathway interventions that related to specific points on a patient's health care journey such as peri-operative care, surgical recovery pathways, and airway support and pain management. Few studies focused on interventions related to a holistic patient-centred approach to care for patients with extreme obesity. Limited evidence existed on specific interventions that focused on safe moving and handling (26; 12.4%) and patient mobility (5; 2%). The most frequently measured outcomes were patient deterioration (193; 78%), patient injury (145; 59%) and medication safety (84; 34%).ConclusionsCurrent evidence predominantly focuses on isolated bariatric surgery patients rather than system-wide care delivery with a lack of evidence on addressing health care inequities between patients with extreme obesity and those of normal weight. This EGM provides an interactive resource to guide policymakers and service commissioners in developing comprehensive hospital services and to support clinicians in implementing coordinated care pathways. Researchers can use this EGM to identify and address gaps in evidence for integrated care approaches. Urgent research is needed to develop evidence-based frameworks for safe, dignified care delivery in the inpatient setting. This will ensure health care systems can effectively support patients with extreme obesity beyond specialised bariatric settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":15953,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","volume":" ","pages":"13558196251349448"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196251349448","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectivesWe set out to produce an evidence and gap map (EGM) on health care service interventions to improve health care outcomes for hospitalised patients with extreme obesity. Hospitalised patients with extreme obesity have poorer health care outcomes compared to normal weight patients. We also considered how hospital services can be coordinated and delivered to meet the care needs of patients with extreme obesity.MethodsA standardised five-stage EGM method was used to develop an intervention-outcome framework; identify current evidence; critically appraise the quality of evidence, extract, code, and summarise data in relation to the EGM objectives; and create a visualisation map to present findings. EPPI Reviewer Web software was used to generate an interactive EGM. The intervention-outcome framework was developed from internationally recognised health system performance and quality standards. This framework consisted of nine intervention (specialist workforce, special care pathways, assessment tools, equipment, moving and handling, specialist care areas, education, care bundles/packages, patient mobility) and six outcome categories (safety, effectiveness, efficiency, timely access, patient experience, health equity). Inclusion criteria were systematic reviews and primary studies that reported on health service interventions aimed to improve health care outcomes for patients with extreme obesity in the inpatient setting. Thirteen electronic databases were searched to identify studies for eligibility. The original searches were completed between November 2021 and March 2022. A repeat search was completed in August 2023.ResultsOf the 64,574 studies retrieved, 247 met eligibility criteria. Most of the excluded studies specifically related to bariatric weight loss surgical procedures or interventional techniques which could not be more broadly generalised to health care service provision. Of the 247 studies included, most studies (210; 85%) involved special care pathway interventions that related to specific points on a patient's health care journey such as peri-operative care, surgical recovery pathways, and airway support and pain management. Few studies focused on interventions related to a holistic patient-centred approach to care for patients with extreme obesity. Limited evidence existed on specific interventions that focused on safe moving and handling (26; 12.4%) and patient mobility (5; 2%). The most frequently measured outcomes were patient deterioration (193; 78%), patient injury (145; 59%) and medication safety (84; 34%).ConclusionsCurrent evidence predominantly focuses on isolated bariatric surgery patients rather than system-wide care delivery with a lack of evidence on addressing health care inequities between patients with extreme obesity and those of normal weight. This EGM provides an interactive resource to guide policymakers and service commissioners in developing comprehensive hospital services and to support clinicians in implementing coordinated care pathways. Researchers can use this EGM to identify and address gaps in evidence for integrated care approaches. Urgent research is needed to develop evidence-based frameworks for safe, dignified care delivery in the inpatient setting. This will ensure health care systems can effectively support patients with extreme obesity beyond specialised bariatric settings.

卫生保健服务干预措施改善住院极度肥胖患者的卫生保健结果:证据和差距图
目的:我们着手制作医疗保健服务干预措施的证据和差距图(EGM),以改善住院极度肥胖患者的医疗保健结果。与正常体重的患者相比,极度肥胖的住院患者的医疗保健结果较差。我们还考虑了如何协调和提供医院服务,以满足极度肥胖患者的护理需求。方法采用标准化五阶段EGM方法建立干预-结果框架;确定现有证据;批判性地评估证据的质量,提取、编码和总结与环境评估目标相关的数据;并创建一个可视化地图来展示研究结果。使用EPPI Reviewer Web软件生成交互式EGM。干预-结果框架是根据国际公认的卫生系统绩效和质量标准制定的。该框架包括九项干预措施(专业人员队伍、特殊护理途径、评估工具、设备、移动和处理、专业护理领域、教育、护理包/包、患者流动性)和六项结果类别(安全、有效性、效率、及时获取、患者体验、卫生公平)。纳入标准是系统评价和初步研究,这些研究报告了旨在改善住院极度肥胖患者医疗保健结果的卫生服务干预措施。检索了13个电子数据库以确定合格的研究。最初的搜索在2021年11月至2022年3月之间完成。重复搜索于2023年8月完成。结果在检索到的64,574项研究中,247项符合入选标准。大多数被排除的研究专门与减肥外科手术或介入性技术有关,这些研究不能更广泛地推广到卫生保健服务提供。在纳入的247项研究中,大多数研究(210;85%)涉及与患者医疗保健过程中特定点相关的特殊护理途径干预,如围手术期护理、手术恢复途径、气道支持和疼痛管理。很少有研究关注与以患者为中心的整体方法治疗极端肥胖患者相关的干预措施。关于侧重于安全移动和处理的具体干预措施的证据有限(26;12.4%)和患者活动能力(5%;2%)。最常测量的结果是患者病情恶化(193;78%),患者损伤(145;59%)和用药安全(84%;34%)。结论:目前的证据主要集中在孤立的减肥手术患者,而不是整个系统的护理服务,缺乏解决极端肥胖患者和正常体重患者之间医疗保健不平等的证据。该EGM提供了一个互动资源,以指导决策者和服务专员发展综合医院服务,并支持临床医生实施协调的护理途径。研究人员可以使用这种EGM来确定和解决综合护理方法的证据差距。迫切需要开展研究,以制定基于证据的框架,以便在住院环境中提供安全、有尊严的护理。这将确保卫生保健系统能够在专门的减肥设置之外有效地支持极端肥胖患者。
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
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy provides a unique opportunity to explore the ideas, policies and decisions shaping health services throughout the world. Edited and peer-reviewed by experts in the field and with a high academic standard and multidisciplinary approach, readers will gain a greater understanding of the current issues in healthcare policy and research. The journal"s strong international editorial advisory board also ensures that readers obtain a truly global and insightful perspective.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信