Polypharmacy, and the associated adverse drug events such as non-adherence to prescriptions, is a common problem for elderly people living with multiple comorbidities. Deprescribing, i.e. the gradual withdrawal from medications with supervision by a healthcare professional, is regarded as a means of reducing adverse effects of multiple medications including non-adherence. This systematic review examines the evidence of deprescribing as an effective strategy for improving medication adherence amongst older, community dwelling adults. A mixed methods review was undertaken. Eight bibliographic database and two clinical trials registers were searched between May and December 2017. Results were double screened in accordance with pre-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria related to polypharmacy, deprescribing and adherence in older, community dwelling populations. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for quality appraisal and an a priori data collection instrument was used. For the quantitative studies, a narrative synthesis approach was taken. The qualitative data was analysed using framework analysis. Findings were integrated using a mixed methods technique. The review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA reporting statement. A total of 22 original studies were included, of which 12 were RCTs. Deprescribing with adherence as an outcome measure was identified in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), observational and cohort studies from 13 countries between 1996 and 2017. There were 17 pharmacy-led interventions; others were led by General Practitioners (GP) and nurses. Four studies demonstrated an overall reduction in medications of which all studies corresponded with improved adherence. A total of thirteen studies reported improved adherence of which 5 were RCTs. Adherence was reported as a secondary outcome in all but one study. There is insufficient evidence to show that deprescribing improves medication adherence. Only 13 studies (of 22) reported adherence of which only 5 were randomised controlled trials. Older people are particularly susceptible to non-adherence due to multi-morbidity associated with polypharmacy. Bio-psycho-social factors including health literacy and multi-disciplinary team interventions influence adherence. The authors recommend further study into the efficacy and outcomes of medicines management interventions. A consensus on priority outcome measurements for prescribed medications is indicated. PROSPERO number CRD42017075315.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to map the barriers to women leadership across healthcare, academia and business, and identify barriers prevalence across sectors. A barriers thematic map, with quantitative logic, and a prevalence chart have been developed, with the aim to uncover inequalities and provide orientation to develop inclusion and equal opportunity strategies within different work environments. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic literature review method was adopted across five electronic databases. Rigorous inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select relevant publications, followed by critical appraisal of the eligible articles. The geographical target was Europe, with a publication time range spanning the period from 2000 to 2015. Certain specialized international studies were also examined. The key themes were identified using summative content analysis and the findings were analyzed using qualitative meta-summary method to formulate hypotheses for subsequent research. Findings: In total, 26 barriers were identified across the aforementioned sectors. A high degree of barriers commonalities was identified, with some striking differences between the prevalence of barriers across sectors. Research limitations/implications: The results of this study may need further validation using statistical methodology given the knowledge base gaps regarding the range of barriers and the differences in their prevalence. Bias and interpretation in reporting anchored in different theoretical frameworks ought to be further examined. Additional variables such as ambiguously stated barriers, sector overlap, women’s own choices, cultural and educational background and analysis in the context of the economic crisis, ensuing austerity and migratory pressure, are also worth exploring. Practical implications: Women’s notable and persisting underrepresentation in top leading positions across sectors reflects a critical drawback in terms of organizational and societal progress particularly regarding inclusion and balanced decision making. Practice-related blind spots may need to be further examined and addressed through specific policies. Originality/value: The comparative nature of barriers to women leadership across three sectors allows the reader to contrast the differences in gender inequalities and to comprehend inclusion challenges in healthcare, academia and business. The authors draw attention to varying degrees of barriers prevalence that have been understudied and deserve to be further explored. This gap in knowledge extends to policy, thus, highlighting the need to address the gender equality and inclusion challenges in a context-specific manner across work environments.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to review evidence on the nature of effective leadership in interprofessional health and social care teams. Design/methodology/approach: A critical review and thematic synthesis of research literature conducted using systematic methods to identify and construct a framework to explain the available evidence about leadership in interprofessional health and social care teams. Findings: Twenty-eight papers were reviewed and contributed to the framework for interprofessional leadership. Twelve themes emerged from the literature, the themes were: facilitate shared leadership; transformation and change; personal qualities; goal alignment; creativity and innovation; communication; team-building; leadership clarity; direction setting; external liaison; skill mix and diversity; clinical and contextual expertise. The discussion includes some comparative analysis with theories and themes in team management and team leadership. Originality/value: This research identifies some of the characteristics of effective leadership of interprofessional health and social care teams. By capturing and synthesising the literature, it is clear that effective interprofessional health and social care team leadership requires a unique blend of knowledge and skills that support innovation and improvement. Further research is required to deepen the understanding of the degree to which team leadership results in better outcomes for both patients and teams.

There is a need to ensure that healthcare organisations enable their workforces to use digital methods in service delivery. This study aimed to evaluate the current level of digital understanding and ability in nursing, midwifery, and allied health workforces and identify some of the training requirements to improve digital literacy in these health professionals. Representatives from eight healthcare organizations in Victoria, Australia participated in focus groups. Three digital frameworks informed the focus group topic guide that sought to examine the barriers and enablers to adopting digital healthcare along with training requirements to improve digital literacy. Twenty-three participants self-rated digital knowledge and skills using Likert scales and attended the focus groups. Mid-range scores were given for digital ability in nursing, midwifery, and allied health professionals. Focus group participants expressed concern over the gap between their organizations’ adoption of digital methods relative to their digital ability, and there were concerns about cyber security. Participants also saw a need for the inclusion of consumers in digital design. Given the widening gap between digital innovation and health workforce digital capability, there is a need to accelerate digital literacy by rapidly deploying education and training and policies and procedures for digital service delivery.

Background: Hospital falls continue to be a persistent global issue with serious harmful consequences for patients and health services. Many clinical practice guidelines now exist for hospital falls, and there is a need to appraise recommendations. Method: A systematic review and critical appraisal of the global literature was conducted, compliant with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Epistemonikos, Infobase of Clinical Practice Guidelines, Cochrane CENTRAL and PEDro databases were searched from 1 January 1993 to 1 February 2024. The quality of guidelines was assessed by two independent reviewers using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Global Rating Scale and Appraisal of Guidelines of Research and Evaluation Recommendation Excellence (AGREE-REX). Certainty of findings was rated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research. Data were analysed using thematic synthesis. Results: 2404 records were screened, 77 assessed for eligibility, and 20 hospital falls guidelines were included. Ten had high AGREE-REX quality scores. Key analytic themes were as follows: (i) there was mixed support for falls risk screening at hospital admission, but scored screening tools were no longer recommended; (ii) comprehensive falls assessment was recommended for older or frail patients; (iii) single and multifactorial falls interventions were consistently recommended; (iv) a large gap existed in patient engagement in guideline development and implementation; (v) barriers to implementation included ambiguities in how staff and patient falls education should be conducted, how delirium and dementia are managed to prevent falls, and documentation of hospital falls. Conclusion: Evidence-based hospital falls guidelines are now available, yet systematic implementation across the hospital sector is more limited. There is a need to ensure an integrated and consistent approach to evidence-based falls prevention for a diverse range of hospital patients.

Retention of care support workers in residential aged care facilities and home-based, domiciliary aged care is a global challenge, with rapid turnover, low job satisfaction, and poorly defined career pathways. A mixed-methods systematic review of the workforce literature was conducted to understand the factors that attract and retain care staff across the aged care workforce. The search yielded 49 studies. Three studies tested education and training interventions with the aim of boosting workforce retention and the remaining 46 studies explored opinions and experiences of care workers in 20 quantitative, four mixed-methods and 22 qualitative studies. A range of factors impacted retention of aged care staff. Two broad themes emerged from the analysis: individual and organisational factors facilitating retention. Individual factors related to personal satisfaction with the role, positive relationships with other staff, families, and residents, and a cooperative workplace culture. Organisational factors included opportunities for on-the-job training and career development, appropriate wages, policies to prevent workplace injuries, and job stability. Understaffing was often cited as a factor associated with turnover, together with heavy workloads, stress, and low job satisfaction. With global concerns about the safety and quality of aged care services, this study presents the data associated with best practice for retaining aged care workers.