Objective: Identify barriers and facilitators in access to medicines for diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia, considering patient, health provider, and health system perspectives.Methods: Scoping review based on Joanna Briggs methodology. The search considered PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Academic Search Ultimate, Web of Science, SciELO Citation Index, and grey literature. Two researchers conducted screening and eligibility phases. Data were thematically analyzed.Results: The review included 219 documents. Diabetes was the most studied condition; most of the evidence comes from patients and the United States. Affordability and availability of medicines were the most reported dimension and specific barrier respectively, both cross-cutting concerns. Among high- and middle-income countries, identified barriers were cost of medicines, accompaniment by professionals, long distances to facilities, and cultural aspects; cost of transportation emerges in low-income settings. Facilitators reported were financial accessibility, trained health workers, medicines closer to communities, and patients’ education.Conclusion: Barriers and facilitators are determined by socioeconomic and cultural conditions, highlighting the role of health systems in regulatory and policy context (assuring financial coverage and free medicines); providers’ role bringing medicines closer; and patients’ health education and disease management.

Objectives: This scoping review is aimed to summarize current knowledge on respiratory support adjustments and monitoring of metabolic and respiratory variables in mechanically ventilated adult patients performing early mobilization. Data Sources: Eight electronic databases were searched from inception to February 2021, using a predefined search strategy. Study Selection: Two blinded reviewers performed document selection by title, abstract, and full text according to the following criteria: mechanically ventilated adult patients performing any mobilization intervention, respiratory support adjustments, and/or monitoring of metabolic/respiratory real-time variables. Data Extraction: Four physiotherapists extracted relevant information using a prespecified template. Data Synthesis: From 1,208 references screened, 35 documents were selected for analysis, where 20 (57%) were published between 2016 and 2020. Respiratory support settings (ventilatory modes or respiratory variables) were reported in 21 documents (60%). Reported modes were assisted (n = 11) and assist-control (n = 9). Adjustment of variables and modes were identified in only seven documents (20%). The most frequent respiratory variable was the Fio 2, and only four studies modified the level of ventilatory support. Mechanical ventilator brand/model used was not specified in 26 documents (74%). Monitoring of respiratory, metabolic, and both variables were reported in 22 documents (63%), four documents (11%) and 10 documents (29%), respectively. These variables were reported to assess the physiologic response (n = 21) or safety (n = 13). Monitored variables were mostly respiratory rate (n = 26), pulse oximetry (n = 22), and oxygen consumption (n = 9). Remarkably, no study assessed the work of breathing or effort during mobilization. Conclusions: Little information on respiratory support adjustments during mobilization of mechanically ventilated patients was identified. Monitoring of metabolic and respiratory variables is also scant. More studies on the effects of adjustments of the level/mode of ventilatory support on exercise performance and respiratory muscle activity monitoring for safe and efficient implementation of early mobilization in mechanically ventilated patients are needed.