Browsing by Author "Cruz, EB"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Implementation of digital health in rural populations with chronic musculoskeletal conditions: A scoping review protocolPublication . Campos, L; Costa, D; Donato, H; Nunes, B; Cruz, EBMusculoskeletal conditions are a major source of disability worldwide, and its burden have been rising in the last decades. Rural areas, in particular, are associated with higher prevalence of these conditions as well as higher levels of disability, which is likely related to other determinants that affect these communities. Although digital health has been identified as a potential solution to mitigate the impact of these determinants, it is also known that these populations may face barriers that limit the implementation of these interventions. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review is to comprehensively map the evidence regarding the implementation of digital health interventions in rural populations with chronic musculoskeletal conditions. We will include studies published from the year 2000; that report the use of digital interventions that promote prevention, treatment or monitoring of any chronic musculoskeletal condition or chronic pain from musculoskeletal origin, in patients that live in rural areas. This protocol follows the methodological framework for scoping reviews proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, as well as the Joana Briggs Institute (JBI) approach. We will conduct the search on Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science and Scopus, as well as grey literature databases. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts followed by a full-text review to assess the eligibility of the articles. Data extracted will include the identification of the digital interventions used, barriers and enablers identified by the patients or healthcare providers, the patient-level outcomes measured, and the implementation strategies and outcomes reported. By mapping the evidence on the implementation of digital health interventions in rural communities with musculoskeletal conditions, this scoping review will enhance our understanding of their applicability in real-world settings.
- Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature reviewPublication . Domingues, L; Cruz, EB; Pimentel-Santos, FM; Ramiro, S; Donato, H; Manica, SR; Hayden, JA; Buchbinder, R; Branco, JCINTRODUCTION: Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder worldwide. It can result in significant disability and impaired quality of life. More than 50% of patients with neck pain still report symptoms 1 year later despite receiving different forms of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment. Identifying patient characteristics that are modifiable or predict recovery and non-recovery for an individual patient might identify ways of improving outcomes. This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarise the existing evidence regarding baseline patient characteristics associated with recovery and non-recovery, as defined by measures of pain intensity, disability and global perceived improvement. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Six electronic databases, PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro Database, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science, will be searched, with terms related to the review question such as neck pain, prognostic or predictive research, from inception to 28 September of 2018. Studies will be included if they have investigated an association between patient characteristics and outcomes, with at least one follow-up time point. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts followed by a full-text review to assess papers regarding their eligibility. Data from included papers will be extracted using standardised forms, including study and participants' characteristics, outcomes, prognostic factors and effect size of the association. The risk of bias of each study will be assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. A narrative synthesis will be conducted considering the strength, consistency of results and the methodological quality. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-review journal, as a chapter of a doctoral thesis and through presentations at national and international conferences.