Community case management and unplanned hospital admissions in patients with heart failure: A systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis

AIMS

The aim of this study was to describe case management as experienced by patients with heart failure and their health professionals with the aim of understanding why case management might contribute in reducing hospital admissions.

BACKGROUND

Heart failure is a common cause of unplanned hospital admission. The evidence for case management in patients with heart failure for reducing admissions is promising.

DESIGN

Systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.

DATA SOURCE

Searches were conducted in Medline, Psychinfo, Kings Fund database and Cinahl from inception of each database to 16 February 2017.

REVIEW METHODS

Robust systematic review methodology was used to identify qualitative studies describing the experiences of patients with heart failure and healthcare providers of case management. Data were synthesized thematically, and analytic themes were developed.

FINDINGS

Five studies (six papers) from which nine descriptive themes were used to determine three analytic themes. This synthesis showed that case management provides positive quality of care for patients, increases perceived access to services and creates more time to ask questions and develop trusted relationships. For health professionals, case management enhanced care by improved relationships with both patients and colleagues although concerns remained around resources, training and inter-professional conflict.

CONCLUSIONS

This synthesis emphasizes the importance of the quality of being cared for as a patient and caring as a health professional. Case management enhances communication between patients and health professionals, supports patient self-care and self-management and can be an important contributing factor in reducing unplanned admissions for patients with heart failure.

Systematic review of self-management interventions for people with eczema

Eczema is a common long‐term condition, but inadequate support and information can lead to poor adherence and treatment failure. We have reviewed the international literature of interventions designed to promote self‐management in adults and children with eczema. MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, Embase, CINAHL and the Global Resource for EczemA Trials database were searched from their inception to August 2016, for randomized controlled trials. Two authors independently applied eligibility criteria, assessed risk of bias for all included studies and extracted data. Twenty studies (3028 participants) conducted in 11 different countries were included. The majority (n = 18) were based in secondary care and most (n = 16) targeted children with eczema. Reporting of studies, including descriptions of the interventions and the outcomes themselves, was generally poor. Thirteen studies were face‐to‐face educational interventions, five were delivered online and two were studies of written action plans. Follow‐up in most studies (n = 12) was short term (up to 12 weeks). Only six trials specified a single primary outcome. There was limited evidence of effectiveness. Only three studies collected and reported outcomes related to cost and just one study undertook any formal cost‐effectiveness analysis. In summary, we have identified a general absence of well‐conducted and well‐reported randomized controlled trials with a strong theoretical basis. Therefore, there is still uncertainty about how best to support self‐management of eczema in a clinically effective and cost‐effective way. Recommendations on design and conduct of future trials are presented.

What's already known about this topic?

Eczema requires a high degree of self‐management by patients.

Adherence to eczema treatments, and hence control of symptoms, can be poor.

There is uncertainty about how best to support self‐management in a clinically effective and cost‐effective way.

What does this study add?

A wide range of interventions designed to promote self‐management have been evaluated in 20 studies across 11 different countries.

Reporting of the design and conduct of these studies is generally poor, and explicit theory describing how interventions are expected to improve care is uncommon.

What works best for people with eczema and whether it is cost‐effective is unknown.

Recommendations for future trials are made.

Linked Comment: Arents. Br J Dermatol 2017; 177:613–614

Plain language summary available online

Supportive care for men with prostate cancer: why are the trials not working? A systematic review and recommendations for future trials

Men with prostate cancer are likely to have a long illness and experience psychological distress for which supportive care may be helpful. This systematic review describes the evidence for effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of supportive care for men with prostate cancer, taking into account treatment pathway and components of interventions. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and Psychinfo were searched from inception––July 2013 for randomized controlled trials and controlled trials. Two authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Twenty-six studies were included (2740 participants). Interventions were delivered pre and during (n = 12), short-term (n = 8), and longer term (18 months) (n = 5) after primary treatment. No interventions were delivered beyond this time. Few trials recruited ethnic minorities and none recruited men in same sex relationships. Intervention components included information, education, health professional discussion, homework, peer discussion, buddy support, cognitive behavioral therapy, cognitive restructuring, psychoeducation, Reiki and relaxation. Most interventions were delivered for 5–10 weeks. Risk of bias of trials was assessed as unclear for most domains due to lack of information. The majority of trials measuring quality of life and depression found no effect. Relatively few trials measured anxiety, coping skills and self-efficacy, and the majority found no effect. No cost data were available. Trials of supportive care for men with prostate cancer cover a range of interventions but are limited by population diversity, inconsistent measurement and reporting of outcomes, and inability to assess risk of bias. Recommendations on design and conduct of future trials are presented.

Prostate cancer and supportive care: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis of men's experiences and unmet needs

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men worldwide, accounting for an estimated 1.1 million new cases diagnosed in 2012 (www.globocan.iarc.fr). Currently, there is a lack of specific guidance on supportive care for men with prostate cancer. This article describes a qualitative systematic review and synthesis examining men's experience of and need for supportive care. Seven databases were searched; 20 journal articles were identified and critically appraised. A thematic synthesis was conducted in which descriptive themes were drawn out of the data. These were peer support, support from partner, online support, cancer specialist nurse support, self‐care, communication with health professionals, unmet needs (emotional support, information needs, support for treatment‐induced side effects of incontinence and erectile dysfunction) and men's suggestions for improved delivery of supportive care. This was followed by the development of overarching analytic themes which were: uncertainty, reframing, and the timing of receiving treatment, information and support. Our results show that the most valued form of support men experienced following diagnosis was one‐to‐one peer support and support from partners. This review highlights the need for improved access to cancer specialist nurses throughout the care pathway, individually tailored supportive care and psychosexual support for treatment side effects.