{"title":"风湿性心脏病患者坚持使用苄星青霉素G的障碍和促进因素:使用COM-B(能力、机会和行为动机)模型的混合方法系统评价","authors":"Habtamu Abera Areri, Henok Tadele, Sale Workneh","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02691-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Benzathine penicillin G (BPG) is a proven preventive agent for preventing the progression of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) and is recognized as a standard of care. However, ensuring adherence to BPG remains a global challenge. The objective of this review was to synthesize the available evidence on the barriers to and facilitators of BPG adherence among RHD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review included both qualitative and quantitative studies on RHD patients published in the English language. This systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search strategy involved PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Scopus, and Web of Sciences databases to identify keywords and terms contained in the title and abstract and the index terms used to describe articles. The review included papers published from January 1, 2000, to March 30, 2024. Two independent reviewers screened, appraised, and extracted the data. The data analysis was carried out deductively to fit onto the components of the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour) model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this review, 1067 records were screened, and 22 studies with 7338 participants were included. Thirty-five barriers and twenty facilitators were identified and mapped onto COM-B components. Physical capability (e.g., felt healthy), psychological capability (e.g., lack of knowledge), reflective motivation (e.g., poor patient handling), automatic motivation (e.g., BPG injection pain), physical opportunity (e.g., BPG unavailability) and social opportunity (e.g., inadequate counseling) were identified as barriers. The most discussed barrier was automatic motivation, followed by psychological capability and physical opportunity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our review revealed variable levels of BPG adherence across studies and identified significant barriers and facilitators. Further research is recommended to identify contextual interventions to address barriers and capitalize on facilitators.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42024535398.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"297"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11613468/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Barriers and facilitators of benzathine penicillin G adherence among rheumatic heart disease patients: a mixed methods systematic review using the COM-B (capability, opportunity, and motivation for behavior) model.\",\"authors\":\"Habtamu Abera Areri, Henok Tadele, Sale Workneh\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13643-024-02691-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Benzathine penicillin G (BPG) is a proven preventive agent for preventing the progression of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) and is recognized as a standard of care. However, ensuring adherence to BPG remains a global challenge. The objective of this review was to synthesize the available evidence on the barriers to and facilitators of BPG adherence among RHD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review included both qualitative and quantitative studies on RHD patients published in the English language. This systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search strategy involved PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Scopus, and Web of Sciences databases to identify keywords and terms contained in the title and abstract and the index terms used to describe articles. The review included papers published from January 1, 2000, to March 30, 2024. Two independent reviewers screened, appraised, and extracted the data. The data analysis was carried out deductively to fit onto the components of the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour) model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this review, 1067 records were screened, and 22 studies with 7338 participants were included. Thirty-five barriers and twenty facilitators were identified and mapped onto COM-B components. Physical capability (e.g., felt healthy), psychological capability (e.g., lack of knowledge), reflective motivation (e.g., poor patient handling), automatic motivation (e.g., BPG injection pain), physical opportunity (e.g., BPG unavailability) and social opportunity (e.g., inadequate counseling) were identified as barriers. The most discussed barrier was automatic motivation, followed by psychological capability and physical opportunity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our review revealed variable levels of BPG adherence across studies and identified significant barriers and facilitators. Further research is recommended to identify contextual interventions to address barriers and capitalize on facilitators.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42024535398.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"297\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11613468/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02691-1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02691-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:苄星青霉素G (BPG)是一种已证实的预防风湿性心脏病(RHD)进展的药物,被公认为一种标准治疗。然而,确保遵守BPG仍然是一个全球性的挑战。本综述的目的是综合RHD患者BPG依从性障碍和促进因素的现有证据。方法:本系统综述包括以英文发表的RHD患者的定性和定量研究。本系统评价遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行。搜索策略涉及PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、Global Health、Scopus和Web of Sciences数据库,以确定标题和摘要中包含的关键字和术语以及用于描述文章的索引术语。该综述收录了2000年1月1日至2024年3月30日期间发表的论文。两名独立的审稿人对数据进行筛选、评估和提取。数据分析进行演绎,以适应COM-B(能力,机会,动机-行为)模型的组成部分。结果:在本综述中,筛选了1067条记录,包括22项研究,7338名参与者。确定了35个障碍和20个促进因素,并将其映射到COM-B组件上。身体能力(例如,感觉健康)、心理能力(例如,缺乏知识)、反思动机(例如,对病人处理不当)、自动动机(例如,注射BPG的疼痛)、身体机会(例如,无法获得BPG)和社会机会(例如,咨询不足)被确定为障碍。讨论最多的障碍是自动动机,其次是心理能力和生理机会。结论:我们的综述揭示了不同研究中BPG依从性的不同水平,并确定了重要的障碍和促进因素。建议进一步研究以确定情境干预措施,以解决障碍并利用促进者。系统评价注册:PROSPERO CRD42024535398。
Barriers and facilitators of benzathine penicillin G adherence among rheumatic heart disease patients: a mixed methods systematic review using the COM-B (capability, opportunity, and motivation for behavior) model.
Background: Benzathine penicillin G (BPG) is a proven preventive agent for preventing the progression of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) and is recognized as a standard of care. However, ensuring adherence to BPG remains a global challenge. The objective of this review was to synthesize the available evidence on the barriers to and facilitators of BPG adherence among RHD patients.
Methods: This systematic review included both qualitative and quantitative studies on RHD patients published in the English language. This systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search strategy involved PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Scopus, and Web of Sciences databases to identify keywords and terms contained in the title and abstract and the index terms used to describe articles. The review included papers published from January 1, 2000, to March 30, 2024. Two independent reviewers screened, appraised, and extracted the data. The data analysis was carried out deductively to fit onto the components of the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour) model.
Results: In this review, 1067 records were screened, and 22 studies with 7338 participants were included. Thirty-five barriers and twenty facilitators were identified and mapped onto COM-B components. Physical capability (e.g., felt healthy), psychological capability (e.g., lack of knowledge), reflective motivation (e.g., poor patient handling), automatic motivation (e.g., BPG injection pain), physical opportunity (e.g., BPG unavailability) and social opportunity (e.g., inadequate counseling) were identified as barriers. The most discussed barrier was automatic motivation, followed by psychological capability and physical opportunity.
Conclusions: Our review revealed variable levels of BPG adherence across studies and identified significant barriers and facilitators. Further research is recommended to identify contextual interventions to address barriers and capitalize on facilitators.
期刊介绍:
Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.