The effects of co-designed physical activity interventions in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) declines with age despite the knowledge that physical inactivity is a leading cause of disease, death, and disability worldwide. To better tailor PA interventions to older adults, researchers are turning to the collaborative principles of co-design. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the effectiveness of co-designed PA interventions and standard care for increasing PA and other health outcomes (i.e., physical function, quality of life, mental health, functional independence, attendance and attrition rates) in older adults. METHODS: A search was conducted in MEDLINE, AgeLine, CINAHL, Embase, and SPORTDiscus. Records were screened by independent pairs of reviewers. Primary research studies conducted among community-dwelling older adults (age 60+) comparing co-designed PA interventions to standard care were considered for inclusion. Controls included wait-list control, usual care, sham interventions, PA interventions without the use of co-design, and no intervention. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted, and the standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to report effect estimates. Quality of evidence was rated using GRADE. RESULTS: Of 16,191 studies screened, eight (N = 16,733) were included in this review. Most studies reported results favouring the effect of co-design on physical activity; however, only two studies (N = 433) could be pooled for meta-analysis resulting in a SMD of 0.28, (95% CI = -0.13 to 0.69; p = 0.19; I2 = 56%) immediately post-intervention. The GRADE quality of evidence was very low. The quantitative analysis of three studies reported improved physical function. CONCLUSION: This review did not demonstrate that co-designed PA interventions are more effective than standard care for increasing PA in older adults; however, evidence was limited and of very low quality. Further well-designed trials are warranted to better understand the impacts of co-designed PA interventions and how to best implement them into practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022314217.

Evaluation and Improvement of Intern Progress Note Assessments and Plans.

OBJECTIVES: Progress notes communicate providers' assessments of patients' diagnoses, progress, and treatment plans; however, providers perceive that note quality has degraded since the introduction of electronic health records. In this study, we aimed to (1) develop a tool to evaluate progress note assessments and plans with high interrater reliability and (2) assess whether a bundled intervention was associated with improved intern note quality without delaying note file time. METHODS: An 8-member stakeholder team developed a 19-item progress note assessment and plan evaluation (PNAPE) tool and bundled intervention consisting of a new note template and intern training curriculum. Interrater reliability was evaluated by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient. Blinded assessors then used PNAPE to evaluate assessment and plan quality in pre- and postintervention notes (fall 2017 and 2018). RESULTS: PNAPE revealed high internal interrater reliability between assessors (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.86; 95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.95). Total median PNAPE score increased from 13 (interquartile range [IQR]: 12-15) to 15 (IQR: 14-17; P = .008), and median file time decreased from 4:30 pm (IQR: 2:33 pm-6:20 pm) to 1:13 pm (IQR: 12:05 pm-3:59 pm; P < .001) in pre- and postintervention notes. In the postintervention period, a higher proportion of assessments and plans indicated the primary problem requiring ongoing hospitalization and progress of this problem (P = .0016 and P < .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The PNAPE tool revealed high reliability between assessors, and the bundled intervention may be associated with improved intern note assessment and plan quality without delaying file time. Future studies are needed to evaluate whether these improvements can be sustained throughout residency and reproduced in future intern cohorts and other inpatient settings.

Resident Workshop to Improve Inpatient Documentation Using the Progress Note Assessment and Plan Evaluation (PNAPE) Tool.

Introduction: Physicians enter residency with varied knowledge regarding the purpose of progress notes and proficiency writing them. The objective of this study was to test whether resident knowledge, beliefs, and confidence writing inpatient progress notes improved after a 2.5-hour workshop intervention. Methods: An educational workshop and note assessment tool was constructed by resident and faculty stakeholders based on a review of literature and institutional best practices. The Progress Note Assessment and Plan Evaluation (PNAPE) tool was designed to assess adherence to best practices in the assessment and plan section of progress notes. Thirty-four residents from a midsized pediatric residency program attended the workshop, which consisted of didactics and small-group work evaluating sample notes using the PNAPE tool. Participants completed a four-question online pre- and postworkshop survey to evaluate their knowledge of progress note components and attitudes regarding note importance. Pre-post analysis was performed with Chi-square testing for true/false questions, and Mann-Whitney testing for Likert scale questions and summative scores. Results: A majority of pediatric residents completed the preintervention (n = 26, 76% response rate) and postintervention (n = 23, 68% response rate) surveys. Accurate response rate improved in 15 of 20 of the true/false items, with a statistically significant improvement in five items. Resident perceptions of note importance and confidence in note writing also increased. Discussion: A workshop intervention may effectively educate pediatric residents about progress note best practices. Further studies should assess the impact of the intervention on sustained knowledge and beliefs about progress notes and subsequent note quality.

Stent-assisted coiling of cerebrovascular aneurysms: experience at a large tertiary care center with a focus on predictors of recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Stent-assisted coiling is commonly used to treat wide-necked and fusiform cerebral aneurysms. We evaluated our institutional experience with stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms to elucidate potential risk factors for recurrence. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms from 2005 to 2012 resulted in 122 patients with 122 aneurysms. Demographic, peri-procedural, medical comorbidity, and follow-up data were collected. Primary outcomes of interest were procedural safety, efficacy, and aneurysm recurrence. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression and χ2 tests determined the statistical significance of the risk factors. RESULTS: All 122 stent-assisted coiling procedures led to satisfactory obliteration of the aneurysm (3.3% complication rate). Twenty-one (17.2%) patients experienced recurrence at average follow-up of 297 days. Fifteen (71.4%) clinically significant recurrences required retreatment. Eleven of 30 (36.7%) procedures using Enterprise stents had recurrence compared with only 10 of 92 (10.9%) procedures using Neuroform stents (p=0.001). Average coiling packing density (PD) was 20.3% with Enterprise stents and 22.5% with Neuroform stents (p=0.8). In multivariate logistic regression, recurrences requiring recoiling were significantly associated with Enterprise stents (OR 8.57, 95% CI 1.97 to 37.19; p=0.004), females (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.00; p=0.05), and postoperative dextran use (OR 8.42, 95% CI 1.40 to 50.58; p=0.02). Aneurysms with <20% PD were more likely to have a clinically significant recurrence than aneurysms with >20% PD (19% vs 5.1%; p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Stent-assisted coiling for wide-necked cerebral aneurysms has a high therapeutic success rate with low procedure-related morbidity and mortality. Clinically significant recurrences may occur more frequently with Enterprise stents, in aneurysms with low PD, and with post-procedural dextran use.