4.3 Review

Mapping Research Conducted on Long-Term Care Facilities for Older People in Brazil: A Scoping Review

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18041522

关键词

older adults; care homes; nursing homes; long-term care; older people; scoping review

资金

  1. British Council [RLWK8-10028]
  2. Global Challenges Research Fund
  3. Academy of Medical Sciences [GCRFNGR/10102]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This scoping review provides an overview of research conducted in Brazilian long-term care facilities for older adults. It found that most studies were conducted in single LTCFs, urban areas, and non-profit settings, with randomized trials and descriptive studies showing lower methodological quality.
This scoping review aimed to explore the characteristics, strengths, and gaps in research conducted in Brazilian long-term care facilities (LTCFs) for older adults. Electronic searches investigating the residents (>= 60 years old), their families, and the LTCF workforce in Brazil were conducted in Medline, EMBASE, LILACS, and Google Scholar, within the timescale of 1999 to 2018, limited to English, Portuguese, or Spanish. The reference lists were hand searched for additional papers. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for critical appraisal of evidence. Data were reported descriptively considering the study design, using content analysis: 327 studies were included (n = 159 quantitative non-randomized, n = 82 quantitative descriptive, n = 67 qualitative, n = 11 mixed methods, n = 6 randomized controlled trials, and n = 2 translation of assessment tools). Regardless of the study design, most were conducted in a single LTCF (45.8%), in urban locations (84.3%), and in non-profit settings (38.7%). The randomized trials and descriptive studies presented the lowest methodological quality based on the MMAT. This is the first review to provide an overview of research on LTCFs for older people in Brazil. It illustrates an excess of small-scale, predominantly qualitative papers, many of which are reported in ways that do not allow the quality of the work to be assured.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据