Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024
Hybrid approaches to allied health services for children and young people: a scoping review.
СтатьяScoping ReviewПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Krasovsky Tal, Weiss Patrice L, Gafni-Lachter Liat, Kizony Rachel, Gefen Naomi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Hybrid models that integrate both in-person and remote health services are increasingly recognized as a promising approach. Nevertheless, research that defines and characterizes these models in children and young people is scarce and essential for establishing guidelines for implementation of hybrid allied health services. This scoping review evaluates four key aspects of hybrid allied health services in children and young people: 1. definitions, 2. service characteristics, 3. outcome measures, and 4. results of hybrid allied health services.
METHODS: Six databases were searched: Medline (Ovid), Embase, CINHAL, Psycinfo, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Of the 9,868 studies potentially meeting the inclusion criteria, 49 studies focused on children and young people. Following full-text review, n = 21 studies were included.
RESULTS: Terminology used for hybrid allied health services varied across studies which targeted diverse clinical populations and varied in study design, type and frequency of remote and in-person treatments. Over 75% of cases used custom-written software, limiting scalability. All interventions started in-person, possibly to establish a therapeutic alliance and solve technological issues. Most hybrid allied health services (67%) were in mental health, while only a minority involved physical, occupational or speech therapy. The most common outcomes were feasibility and satisfaction, but tools used to measure them were inconsistent. Although 57% of studies demonstrated effectiveness of hybrid allied health services, none measured cost-effectiveness.
DISCUSSION: Despite the potential of hybrid allied health services for children and young people, the literature remains at a preliminary stage. Standardization of definitions and outcome measures, and clearer reporting of service characteristics and results would likely promote consolidation of hybrid allied health services in children and young people into clinical practice.
METHODS: Six databases were searched: Medline (Ovid), Embase, CINHAL, Psycinfo, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Of the 9,868 studies potentially meeting the inclusion criteria, 49 studies focused on children and young people. Following full-text review, n = 21 studies were included.
RESULTS: Terminology used for hybrid allied health services varied across studies which targeted diverse clinical populations and varied in study design, type and frequency of remote and in-person treatments. Over 75% of cases used custom-written software, limiting scalability. All interventions started in-person, possibly to establish a therapeutic alliance and solve technological issues. Most hybrid allied health services (67%) were in mental health, while only a minority involved physical, occupational or speech therapy. The most common outcomes were feasibility and satisfaction, but tools used to measure them were inconsistent. Although 57% of studies demonstrated effectiveness of hybrid allied health services, none measured cost-effectiveness.
DISCUSSION: Despite the potential of hybrid allied health services for children and young people, the literature remains at a preliminary stage. Standardization of definitions and outcome measures, and clearer reporting of service characteristics and results would likely promote consolidation of hybrid allied health services in children and young people into clinical practice.