Background: There is evidence that people with intellectual disabilities experience healthcare inequalities, including access to specialist palliative care, but to date, there has not been a systematic review of empirical evidence. Aim: To identify the palliative care needs of adults with intellectual disabilities and the barriers and facilitators they face in accessing palliative care. Design: Systematic review using a narrative synthesis approach (International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) registration number: CRD42019138974). Data sources: Five databases were searched in June 2019 (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane library and CINAHL) along with hand searches and a search of the grey literature. All study designs were included. Results: A total of 52 studies were identified, all of which were conducted in high-income countries, the majority in the United Kingdom ( n = 28). From a total of 2970 participants across all studies, only 1% were people with intellectual disabilities and 1.3% were family members; the majority (97%) were health/social care professionals. Identified needs included physical needs, psychosocial and spiritual needs, and information and communication needs. Barriers and facilitators were associated with education (e.g. staff knowledge, training and experience), communication (e.g. staff skill in assessing and addressing needs of people with communication difficulties), collaboration (e.g. importance of sustained multidisciplinary approach) and health and social care delivery (e.g. staffing levels, funding and management support). Conclusion: This review highlights the specific problems in providing equitable palliative care for adults with intellectual disabilities, but there is a lack of research into strategies to improve practice. This should be prioritised using methods that include people with intellectual disabilities and families.
Breathlessness, also known as dyspnoea, is a debilitating and frequent symptom. Several reports have highlighted the lack of dyspnoea in a subgroup of patients suffering from COVID-19, sometimes referred to as “silent” or “happy hypoxaemia.” Reports have also mentioned the absence of a clear relationship between the clinical severity of the disease and levels of breathlessness reported by patients. The cerebral complications of COVID-19 have been largely demonstrated with a high prevalence of an acute encephalopathy that could possibly affect the processing of afferent signals or top-down modulation of breathlessness signals. In this review, we aim to highlight the mechanisms involved in breathlessness and summarize the pathophysiology of COVID-19 and its known effects on the brain-lung interaction. We then offer hypotheses for the alteration of breathlessness perception in COVID-19 patients and suggest ways of further researching this phenomenon.
Objectives:
To explore current literature on social determinants of health (SDOH) and cancer among American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations.
Methods:
We searched Ovid MEDLINE
®
, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases for articles published during 2000 to 2020, which included terms for SDOH and cancer occurrence in AI/AN populations. We derived the data extraction elements from the PROGRESS-Plus framework. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-Equity extension guided the evidence map.
Results:
From 2180 screened articles, 297 were included. Most were observational (93.9%), employed a cross-sectional design (83.2%), were categorized as cancer occurrence and surveillance research (62%), and included no cancer-related risk factors (70.7%). Race, gender, and place were the most frequently included PROGRESS-Plus categories. Religion, relationship features, and characteristics of discrimination were least common. Only 12% of articles mentioned historical/current trauma or historical context.
Conclusions:
Gaps exist in our understanding of SDOH as drivers of cancer disparities in AI/AN populations. Future studies in health equity science may incorporate historical and cultural factors into SDOH frameworks tailored for AI/AN populations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.