防止国家痴呆指南建议中的歧视:一项系统综述。

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
PLoS Medicine Pub Date : 2022-01-11 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003860
Tiffeny James, Naaheed Mukadam, Andrew Sommerlad, Hossein Rostami Pour, Melanie Knowles, Ignacia Azocar, Gill Livingston
{"title":"防止国家痴呆指南建议中的歧视:一项系统综述。","authors":"Tiffeny James,&nbsp;Naaheed Mukadam,&nbsp;Andrew Sommerlad,&nbsp;Hossein Rostami Pour,&nbsp;Melanie Knowles,&nbsp;Ignacia Azocar,&nbsp;Gill Livingston","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003860","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>National dementia guidelines provide recommendations about the most effective approaches to diagnosis and interventions. Guidelines can improve care, but some groups such as people with minority characteristics may be disadvantaged if recommended approaches are the same for everyone. It is not known if dementia guidelines address specific needs related to patient characteristics. The objectives of this review are to identify which countries have national guidelines for dementia and synthesise recommendations relating to protected characteristics, as defined in the UK Equality Act 2010: age, disability, gender identity, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Medline databases and the Guideline International Network library from inception to March 4, 2020, for dementia guidelines in any language. We also searched, between April and September 2020, Google and the national health websites of all 196 countries in English and in each country's official languages. To be included, guidelines had to provide recommendations about dementia, which were expected to be followed by healthcare workers and be approved at a national policy level. We rated quality according to the iCAHE guideline quality checklist. We provide a narrative synthesis of recommendations identified for each protected characteristic, prioritising those from higher-quality guidelines. Forty-six guidelines from 44 countries met our criteria, of which 18 were rated as higher quality. Most guidelines (39/46; 85%) made at least one reference to protected characteristics, and we identified recommendations relating to age, disability, race (or culture, ethnicity, or language), religion, sex, and sexual orientation. Age was the most frequently referenced characteristic (31/46; 67%) followed by race (or culture, ethnicity, or language; 25/46; 54%). Recommendations included specialist investigation and support for younger people affected by dementia and consideration of culture when assessing whether someone had dementia and providing person-centred care. Guidelines recommended considering religion when providing person-centred and end-of-life care. For disability, it was recommended that healthcare workers consider intellectual disability and sensory impairment when assessing for dementia. Most recommendations related to sex recommended not using sex hormones to treat cognitive impairment in men and women. One guideline made one recommendation related to sexual orientation. The main limitation of this study is that we only included national guidelines applicable to a whole country meaning guidelines from countries with differing healthcare systems within the country may have been excluded.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>National guidelines for dementia vary in their consideration of protected characteristics. We found that around a fifth of the world's countries have guidelines for dementia. We have identified areas of good practice that can be considered for future guidelines and suggest that all guidelines provide specific evidence-based recommendations for minority groups with examples of how to implement them. This will promote equity in the care of people affected by dementia and help to ensure that people with protected characteristics also have high-quality clinical services.</p>","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"19 1","pages":"e1003860"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8752020/pdf/","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Protection against discrimination in national dementia guideline recommendations: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Tiffeny James,&nbsp;Naaheed Mukadam,&nbsp;Andrew Sommerlad,&nbsp;Hossein Rostami Pour,&nbsp;Melanie Knowles,&nbsp;Ignacia Azocar,&nbsp;Gill Livingston\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pmed.1003860\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>National dementia guidelines provide recommendations about the most effective approaches to diagnosis and interventions. Guidelines can improve care, but some groups such as people with minority characteristics may be disadvantaged if recommended approaches are the same for everyone. It is not known if dementia guidelines address specific needs related to patient characteristics. The objectives of this review are to identify which countries have national guidelines for dementia and synthesise recommendations relating to protected characteristics, as defined in the UK Equality Act 2010: age, disability, gender identity, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Medline databases and the Guideline International Network library from inception to March 4, 2020, for dementia guidelines in any language. We also searched, between April and September 2020, Google and the national health websites of all 196 countries in English and in each country's official languages. To be included, guidelines had to provide recommendations about dementia, which were expected to be followed by healthcare workers and be approved at a national policy level. We rated quality according to the iCAHE guideline quality checklist. We provide a narrative synthesis of recommendations identified for each protected characteristic, prioritising those from higher-quality guidelines. Forty-six guidelines from 44 countries met our criteria, of which 18 were rated as higher quality. Most guidelines (39/46; 85%) made at least one reference to protected characteristics, and we identified recommendations relating to age, disability, race (or culture, ethnicity, or language), religion, sex, and sexual orientation. Age was the most frequently referenced characteristic (31/46; 67%) followed by race (or culture, ethnicity, or language; 25/46; 54%). Recommendations included specialist investigation and support for younger people affected by dementia and consideration of culture when assessing whether someone had dementia and providing person-centred care. Guidelines recommended considering religion when providing person-centred and end-of-life care. For disability, it was recommended that healthcare workers consider intellectual disability and sensory impairment when assessing for dementia. Most recommendations related to sex recommended not using sex hormones to treat cognitive impairment in men and women. One guideline made one recommendation related to sexual orientation. The main limitation of this study is that we only included national guidelines applicable to a whole country meaning guidelines from countries with differing healthcare systems within the country may have been excluded.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>National guidelines for dementia vary in their consideration of protected characteristics. We found that around a fifth of the world's countries have guidelines for dementia. We have identified areas of good practice that can be considered for future guidelines and suggest that all guidelines provide specific evidence-based recommendations for minority groups with examples of how to implement them. This will promote equity in the care of people affected by dementia and help to ensure that people with protected characteristics also have high-quality clinical services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS Medicine\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"e1003860\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8752020/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003860\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003860","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

背景:国家痴呆症指南提供了关于最有效的诊断和干预方法的建议。指导方针可以改善护理,但如果推荐的方法对每个人都一样,一些群体,如少数民族特征的人,可能会处于不利地位。目前尚不清楚痴呆症指南是否涉及与患者特征相关的特定需求。本次审查的目的是确定哪些国家有痴呆症的国家指南,并综合与《2010年英国平等法》中定义的受保护特征相关的建议:年龄、残疾、性别认同、婚姻和民事伴侣关系、怀孕和生育、种族、宗教或信仰、性别和性取向。方法和发现:从成立到2020年3月4日,我们搜索了CINAHL、PsycINFO和Medline数据库以及指南国际网络库,以查找任何语言的痴呆症指南。2020年4月至9月,我们还用英语和每个国家的官方语言搜索了谷歌和所有196个国家的国家健康网站。要纳入该指南,必须提供有关痴呆症的建议,医护人员应遵循这些建议,并在国家政策层面获得批准。我们根据iCAHE指南质量检查表对质量进行了评级。我们提供了针对每个受保护特征确定的建议的叙述性综合,并优先考虑高质量指南中的建议。来自44个国家的46条指南符合我们的标准,其中18条被评为更高质量。大多数指南(39/46;85%)至少提到了一个受保护的特征,我们确定了与年龄、残疾、种族(或文化、民族或语言)、宗教、性别和性取向有关的建议。年龄是最常提及的特征(31/46;67%),其次是种族(或文化、民族或语言;25/46;54%)。建议包括对受痴呆症影响的年轻人进行专家调查和支持,以及在评估某人是否患有痴呆症和提供以人为本的护理时考虑文化因素。指导方针建议在提供以人为中心的临终关怀时考虑宗教。对于残疾,建议医护人员在评估痴呆症时考虑智力残疾和感觉障碍。大多数与性有关的建议都建议不要使用性激素来治疗男性和女性的认知障碍。一项准则提出了一项与性取向有关的建议。这项研究的主要局限性是,我们只包括适用于整个国家的国家指南,这意味着来自国内不同医疗系统国家的指南可能被排除在外。结论:国家痴呆症指南在考虑受保护特征方面各不相同。我们发现,世界上大约五分之一的国家都有痴呆症的指导方针。我们已经确定了未来指导方针可以考虑的良好做法领域,并建议所有指导方针都为少数群体提供具体的循证建议,并举例说明如何实施这些建议。这将促进痴呆症患者护理的公平性,并有助于确保具有受保护特征的人也能获得高质量的临床服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Protection against discrimination in national dementia guideline recommendations: A systematic review.

Protection against discrimination in national dementia guideline recommendations: A systematic review.

Protection against discrimination in national dementia guideline recommendations: A systematic review.

Background: National dementia guidelines provide recommendations about the most effective approaches to diagnosis and interventions. Guidelines can improve care, but some groups such as people with minority characteristics may be disadvantaged if recommended approaches are the same for everyone. It is not known if dementia guidelines address specific needs related to patient characteristics. The objectives of this review are to identify which countries have national guidelines for dementia and synthesise recommendations relating to protected characteristics, as defined in the UK Equality Act 2010: age, disability, gender identity, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.

Methods and findings: We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Medline databases and the Guideline International Network library from inception to March 4, 2020, for dementia guidelines in any language. We also searched, between April and September 2020, Google and the national health websites of all 196 countries in English and in each country's official languages. To be included, guidelines had to provide recommendations about dementia, which were expected to be followed by healthcare workers and be approved at a national policy level. We rated quality according to the iCAHE guideline quality checklist. We provide a narrative synthesis of recommendations identified for each protected characteristic, prioritising those from higher-quality guidelines. Forty-six guidelines from 44 countries met our criteria, of which 18 were rated as higher quality. Most guidelines (39/46; 85%) made at least one reference to protected characteristics, and we identified recommendations relating to age, disability, race (or culture, ethnicity, or language), religion, sex, and sexual orientation. Age was the most frequently referenced characteristic (31/46; 67%) followed by race (or culture, ethnicity, or language; 25/46; 54%). Recommendations included specialist investigation and support for younger people affected by dementia and consideration of culture when assessing whether someone had dementia and providing person-centred care. Guidelines recommended considering religion when providing person-centred and end-of-life care. For disability, it was recommended that healthcare workers consider intellectual disability and sensory impairment when assessing for dementia. Most recommendations related to sex recommended not using sex hormones to treat cognitive impairment in men and women. One guideline made one recommendation related to sexual orientation. The main limitation of this study is that we only included national guidelines applicable to a whole country meaning guidelines from countries with differing healthcare systems within the country may have been excluded.

Conclusions: National guidelines for dementia vary in their consideration of protected characteristics. We found that around a fifth of the world's countries have guidelines for dementia. We have identified areas of good practice that can be considered for future guidelines and suggest that all guidelines provide specific evidence-based recommendations for minority groups with examples of how to implement them. This will promote equity in the care of people affected by dementia and help to ensure that people with protected characteristics also have high-quality clinical services.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
21.60
自引率
0.60%
发文量
227
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: PLOS Medicine aims to be a leading platform for research and analysis on the global health challenges faced by humanity. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedicine, the environment, society, and politics, that affect the well-being of individuals worldwide. It particularly highlights studies that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or our understanding of disease mechanisms, with the ultimate goal of improving health outcomes in diverse settings. Unwavering in its commitment to ethical standards, PLOS Medicine ensures integrity in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and transparently disclosing any conflicts of interest during the reporting, peer review, and publication processes. The journal promotes transparency by providing visibility into the review and publication procedures. It also encourages data sharing and the reuse of published work. Author rights are upheld, allowing them to retain copyright. Furthermore, PLOS Medicine strongly supports Open Access publishing, making research articles freely available to all without restrictions, facilitating widespread dissemination of knowledge. The journal does not endorse drug or medical device advertising and refrains from exclusive sales of reprints to avoid conflicts of interest.
×
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