David I Buckley, Frances Hsu, Tracy Dana, Keeley Blackie, Rebecca Holmes, Peggy Nygren, Willi Horner-Johnson, Christina Nicolaidis, Roger Chou
{"title":"为残疾人提供临床预防服务的卫生保健服务:系统综述。","authors":"David I Buckley, Frances Hsu, Tracy Dana, Keeley Blackie, Rebecca Holmes, Peggy Nygren, Willi Horner-Johnson, Christina Nicolaidis, Roger Chou","doi":"10.7326/ANNALS-24-02446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People with disabilities are less likely than the general population to receive clinical preventive services.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To summarize barriers to and facilitators of receipt of preventive services and effectiveness of interventions to improve receipt of preventive services among people with disabilities.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Five electronic databases through September 2024.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Dual independent screening of abstracts and full texts for 20 recommended preventive services.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Single reviewer, with a second reviewer verifying accuracy.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>Among 11 586 references, 74 studies were included (60 on barriers and facilitators, 16 on interventions, and 2 on both barriers/facilitators and interventions). Most evidence was on screening for breast (<i>n</i> = 48) and cervical (<i>n</i> = 33) cancer. Barriers to and facilitators of breast and cervical cancer screening spanned all disability types and across environment, individual, provider, and health care levels. Six randomized controlled trials studied educational interventions for people with physical disabilities (<i>n</i> = 2); cognitive, intellectual, or developmental disabilities (<i>n</i> = 2); sensory disabilities (<i>n</i> = 1); and serious mental illness (<i>n</i> = 1), with mixed findings on effectiveness for different preventive services. Evidence on specific components or harms of interventions was limited.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>High methodological or clinical heterogeneity and limited data for most preventive services and disability types.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Barriers and facilitators for people with disabilities are described for breast and cervical cancer screening at the environment, individual, provider, and health care levels. Randomized studies on general educational interventions target the patient, the caregiver, and providers of people with specific disabilities. Research is needed on interventions that address barriers to and facilitators of receipt of preventive services for people with disabilities.</p><p><strong>Primary funding source: </strong>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (Protocol registered at https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/products/people-with-disabilities/protocol).</p>","PeriodicalId":7932,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Internal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":19.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health Care Delivery of Clinical Preventive Services for People With Disabilities : <b>A Systematic Review</b>.\",\"authors\":\"David I Buckley, Frances Hsu, Tracy Dana, Keeley Blackie, Rebecca Holmes, Peggy Nygren, Willi Horner-Johnson, Christina Nicolaidis, Roger Chou\",\"doi\":\"10.7326/ANNALS-24-02446\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People with disabilities are less likely than the general population to receive clinical preventive services.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To summarize barriers to and facilitators of receipt of preventive services and effectiveness of interventions to improve receipt of preventive services among people with disabilities.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Five electronic databases through September 2024.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Dual independent screening of abstracts and full texts for 20 recommended preventive services.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Single reviewer, with a second reviewer verifying accuracy.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>Among 11 586 references, 74 studies were included (60 on barriers and facilitators, 16 on interventions, and 2 on both barriers/facilitators and interventions). Most evidence was on screening for breast (<i>n</i> = 48) and cervical (<i>n</i> = 33) cancer. Barriers to and facilitators of breast and cervical cancer screening spanned all disability types and across environment, individual, provider, and health care levels. Six randomized controlled trials studied educational interventions for people with physical disabilities (<i>n</i> = 2); cognitive, intellectual, or developmental disabilities (<i>n</i> = 2); sensory disabilities (<i>n</i> = 1); and serious mental illness (<i>n</i> = 1), with mixed findings on effectiveness for different preventive services. Evidence on specific components or harms of interventions was limited.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>High methodological or clinical heterogeneity and limited data for most preventive services and disability types.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Barriers and facilitators for people with disabilities are described for breast and cervical cancer screening at the environment, individual, provider, and health care levels. Randomized studies on general educational interventions target the patient, the caregiver, and providers of people with specific disabilities. Research is needed on interventions that address barriers to and facilitators of receipt of preventive services for people with disabilities.</p><p><strong>Primary funding source: </strong>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (Protocol registered at https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/products/people-with-disabilities/protocol).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7932,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Internal Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":19.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Internal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7326/ANNALS-24-02446\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Annals of Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7326/ANNALS-24-02446","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Health Care Delivery of Clinical Preventive Services for People With Disabilities : A Systematic Review.
Background: People with disabilities are less likely than the general population to receive clinical preventive services.
Purpose: To summarize barriers to and facilitators of receipt of preventive services and effectiveness of interventions to improve receipt of preventive services among people with disabilities.
Data sources: Five electronic databases through September 2024.
Study selection: Dual independent screening of abstracts and full texts for 20 recommended preventive services.
Data extraction: Single reviewer, with a second reviewer verifying accuracy.
Data synthesis: Among 11 586 references, 74 studies were included (60 on barriers and facilitators, 16 on interventions, and 2 on both barriers/facilitators and interventions). Most evidence was on screening for breast (n = 48) and cervical (n = 33) cancer. Barriers to and facilitators of breast and cervical cancer screening spanned all disability types and across environment, individual, provider, and health care levels. Six randomized controlled trials studied educational interventions for people with physical disabilities (n = 2); cognitive, intellectual, or developmental disabilities (n = 2); sensory disabilities (n = 1); and serious mental illness (n = 1), with mixed findings on effectiveness for different preventive services. Evidence on specific components or harms of interventions was limited.
Limitations: High methodological or clinical heterogeneity and limited data for most preventive services and disability types.
Conclusion: Barriers and facilitators for people with disabilities are described for breast and cervical cancer screening at the environment, individual, provider, and health care levels. Randomized studies on general educational interventions target the patient, the caregiver, and providers of people with specific disabilities. Research is needed on interventions that address barriers to and facilitators of receipt of preventive services for people with disabilities.
Primary funding source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (Protocol registered at https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/products/people-with-disabilities/protocol).
期刊介绍:
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians (ACP), Annals of Internal Medicine is the premier internal medicine journal. Annals of Internal Medicine’s mission is to promote excellence in medicine, enable physicians and other health care professionals to be well informed members of the medical community and society, advance standards in the conduct and reporting of medical research, and contribute to improving the health of people worldwide. To achieve this mission, the journal publishes a wide variety of original research, review articles, practice guidelines, and commentary relevant to clinical practice, health care delivery, public health, health care policy, medical education, ethics, and research methodology. In addition, the journal publishes personal narratives that convey the feeling and the art of medicine.