Access to Health Services in Older Minority Ethnic Groups with Dementia: A Systematic Review.
Access to Health Services in Older Minority Ethnic Groups with Dementia: A Systematic Review.
复制标题
痴呆症老年族裔群体获得卫生服务：系统评价。
DOI：
10.1111/jgs.16929
复制
发表时间：
2021-03
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Prina M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Co M;Couch E;Gao Q;Mac-Ginty S;Das-Munshi J;Prina M
虽然人们承认，在国际环境中，少数民族（ME）群体在获得痴呆症护理方面面临障碍，但尚不清楚ME群体是否因此获得服务的频率较低。本综述的目的是根据现有文献，研究ME组在获得痴呆/记忆服务前是否有更长的延迟，是否有更高的急性护理和危机服务使用率，是否有更低的常规护理服务使用率。我们还研究了在记忆力服务中，肌痛性脑瘫组是否有更高的痴呆严重程度或更低的认知能力。系统回顾与叙事综合。非住宅医疗、精神病学、记忆和紧急服务。20项研究共94431名老年痴呆或轻度认知障碍患者。我们检索了Embase、Ovid MEDLINE、Global Health和PsycINFO从成立到2018年11月的同行评审观察性研究，这些研究量化了少数民族在痴呆症患者非住宅医疗服务使用方面的差异。采用叙事综合法分析研究结果。纳入20项研究，主要来自美国（n = 13），以及英国（n = 4）、澳大利亚（n = 1）、比利时（n = 1）和荷兰（n = 1）。几乎没有证据表明，在任何国家，肌痛性脊髓炎组获得常规护理的比率与对照组不同，尽管研究可能力度不足。有强有力的证据表明，非裔美国人/黑人群体与美国对照组相比，使用医院住院服务的比例更高。初级保健和急救服务的研究较少。研究质量参差不齐，在确定和定义种族和服务使用结果的方式上存在很大的可变性。有证据表明，一些ME群体，如美国的黑人/非裔美国人群体，可能比比较人群使用更多的急性护理服务，但在常规护理使用方面的差异证据较少。研究很少，尤其是在美国以外
While it is acknowledged that minority ethnic (ME) groups across international settings face barriers to accessing care for dementia, it is not clear whether ME groups access services less frequently as a result. The objective of this review is to examine whether ME groups have longer delays before accessing dementia/memory services, higher use of acute care and crisis services and lower use of routine care services based on existing literature. We also examined whether ME groups had higher dementia severity or lower cognition when presenting to memory services. Systematic review with narrative synthesis. Nonresidential medical, psychiatric, memory, and emergency services. Twenty studies totaling 94,431 older adults with dementia or mild cognitive impairment. We searched Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Global Health, and PsycINFO from inception to November 2018 for peer‐reviewed observational studies which quantified ethnic minority differences in nonresidential health service use in people with dementia. Narrative synthesis was used to analyze findings. Twenty studies were included, mostly from the U.S. (n = 13), as well as the UK (n = 4), Australia (n = 1), Belgium (n = 1), and the Netherlands (n = 1). There was little evidence that ME groups in any country accessed routine care at different rates than comparison groups, although studies may have been underpowered. There was strong evidence that African American/Black groups had higher use of hospital inpatient services versus U.S. comparison groups. Primary care and emergency services were less well studied. Study quality was mixed, and there was a large amount of variability in the way ethnicity and service use outcomes were ascertained and defined. There is evidence that some ME groups, such as Black/African American groups in the U.S., may use more acute care services than comparison populations, but less evidence for differences in routine care use. Research is sparse, especially outside the U.S.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1016/j.trci.2018.08.009
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)
影响因子：
--
作者：
Chen C;Zissimopoulos JM
通讯作者：
Zissimopoulos JM
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Herzog R;Álvarez-Pasquin MJ;Díaz C;Del Barrio JL;Estrada JM;Gil Á
通讯作者：
Gil Á
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Daker-White, G;Beattie, AM;Means, R
通讯作者：
Means, R
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Husaini, BA;Sherkat, DE;Cain, VA
通讯作者：
Cain, VA
影响因子：
3.1
作者：
Laditka, James N.;Laditka, Sarah B.
通讯作者：
Laditka, Sarah B.