Literature Collection

INTRODUCTION: Integrated care models aim to provide solutions to fragmentation of care by improving coordination. This study will evaluate the effectiveness of a new integrated care model (Salut + Social), which will promote the coordination and communication between social and healthcare services in southern Catalonia (Spain) to improve quality of life, adherence to treatment and access to medical services for patients with chronic conditions, and also to reduce caregiver burden. Additionally, we will evaluate the experience of caregivers, health professionals and social workers with the new model implemented. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A clinical trial using mixed methodology will be carried out. The intervention consists of improving the coordination between the social and healthcare sectors during a 6-month period, by means of information and communication technology (ICT) tools that operate as an interface for the integrated care model. The study subjects are primary care patients with chronic health and social conditions that can benefit from a collaborative and coordinated approach. A sample size of 141 patients was estimated. Questionnaires that assess quality of life, treatment adherence, medical service and caregiver burden will be used at baseline and at 6, 9, and 12 months after the beginning of the study. The principal variable is quality of life. For statistical analysis, comparisons of means and proportions at different time points will be performed. A discussion group and semi-structured interviews will be conducted with the aim of improving the care model taking into account the opinions of professionals and caregivers. A thematic content analysis will be carried out. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol has been approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the Fundació Institut Universitari per a la Recerca a l'Atenció Primària de Salut Jordi Gol i Gurina (code P17/100). Articles will be published in international, peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical-Trials.gov: NCT04164160.

BACKGROUND: Within hospital systems, diverse subsets of patients are subject to minimally invasive procedures that provide therapeutic relief and necessary health data that are often perceived as anxiogenic or painful. These feelings are particularly relevant to patients experiencing procedures where they are conscious and not sedated or placed under general anesthesia that renders them incapacitated. Pharmacologic pain management and topical anesthetic creams are used to manage these feelings; however, distraction-based methods can provide nonpharmacologic means to modify the painful experience and discomfort often associated with these procedures. Recent studies support distraction as a useful method for reducing anxiety and pain and as a result, improving patient experience. Virtual reality (VR) is an emerging technology that provides an immersive user experience and can operate through a distraction-based method to reduce the negative or painful experience often related to procedures where the patient is conscious. Given the possible short-term and long-term outcomes of poorly managed pain and enduring among patients, health care professionals are challenged to improve patient well-being during medically essential procedures. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot project is to assess the efficacy of using VR as a distraction-based intervention for anxiety or pain management compared to other nonpharmacologic interventions in a variety of hospital settings, specifically in patients undergoing lumbar puncture procedures and bone marrow biopsies at the oncology ward, patients receiving nerve block for a broken bone at an anesthesia or surgical center, patients undergoing a cleaning at a dental clinic, patients conscious during an ablation procedure at a cardiology clinic, and patients awake during a kidney biopsy at a nephrology clinic. This will provide the framework for additional studies in other health care settings. METHODS: In a single visit, patients eligible for the study will complete brief preprocedural and postprocedural questionnaires about their perceived fear, anxiety, and pain levels. During the procedure, research assistants will place a VR headset on the patient and the patient will undergo a VR experience to distract from any pain felt from the procedure. Participants' vitals, including blood pressure, heart rate, and rate of respiration, will also be recorded before, during, and after the procedure. RESULTS: The study is already underway, and results support a decrease in perceived pain by 1.00 and a decrease in perceived anxiety by 0.3 compared to the control group (on a 10-point Likert scale). Among the VR intervention group, the average rating for comfort was 4.35 out of 5. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide greater insight into how patients' perception of anxiety and pain could potentially be altered. Furthermore, metrics related to the operational efficiency of providing a VR intervention compared to a control will provide insight into the feasibility and integration of such technologies in routine practice. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/52649.

AIMS: To assess the effectiveness, process, and economic outcomes of integrated care for community-dwelling frail older adults. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched nine databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, Wanfang, and VIP, three trial registers, grey literature, and reference lists up to April 2024, with an updated search in March 2025. REVIEW METHODS: Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions involving integrated care for community-dwelling frail older adults were included. Data analysis was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. RESULTS: This review included 12 studies involving 6819 community-dwelling frail older adults from high-income regions. The results indicated that integrated care had significantly positive effects on frailty and functional ability, but not on social function, hospitalisation, nursing home admission, quality of life, and mortality. Outcomes of caregivers and professionals were rarely reported. The cost-effectiveness of integrated care has not been confirmed by limited evidence. Few studies have adopted a systematic approach to designing and conducting comprehensive process evaluations guided by scientific frameworks. CONCLUSION: Integrated care improves frailty and functional ability in community-dwelling frail older adults but lacks consistent benefits for other outcomes. The lack of evidence on cost-effectiveness and the caregiver and professional outcomes highlight critical gaps in current research. The absence of systematic process evaluations underscores the need for future studies to adopt rigorous frameworks to assess them. IMPACT: This implicates that more research, particularly in underserved regions that lack a high standard of usual medical services, should emphasise the outcomes of caregivers and healthcare professionals, process evaluation, and health economics. Policymakers and practitioners must consider these gaps when implementing integrated care programmes to ensure equitable and sustainable healthcare solutions. REPORTING METHOD: PRISMA 2020 Checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024568811.