Hilary Arksey

Bio: Hilary Arksey is an academic researcher from University of York. The author has contributed to research in topics: Respite care & Health care. The author has an hindex of 22, co-authored 39 publications receiving 11751 citations.

Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

Abstract: This paper focuses on scoping studies, an approach to reviewing the literature which to date has received little attention in the research methods literature. We distinguish between different types of scoping studies and indicate where these stand in relation to full systematic reviews. We outline a framework for conducting a scoping study based on our recent experiences of reviewing the literature on services for carers for people with mental health problems. Where appropriate, our approach to scoping the field is contrasted with the procedures followed in systematic reviews. We emphasize how including a consultation exercise in this sort of study may enhance the results, making them more useful to policy makers, practitioners and service users. Finally, we consider the advantages and limitations of the approach and suggest that a wider debate is called for about the role of the scoping study in relation to other types of literature reviews.

A systematic review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different models of community-based respite care for frail older people and their carers.

Abstract: Objectives To review the evidence for different models of community-based respite care for frail older people and their carers, where the participant group included older people with frailty, disability, cancer or dementia. Where data permitted, subgroups of carers and care recipients, for whom respite care is particularly effective or cost-effective, were to be identified. Data sources Major databases were searched from 1980 to March 2005. Ongoing and recently completed research databases were searched in July 2005. Review methods Data from relevant studies were extracted and quality assessed. The possible effects of study quality on the effectiveness data and review findings were discussed. Where sufficient clinically and statistically similar data were available, data were pooled using appropriate statistical techniques. Results Twenty-two primary studies were included. Most of the evidence came from North America, with a minority of effectiveness and economic studies based in the UK. Types of service studied included day care, host family, in-home, institutional and video respite. Effectiveness evidence suggests that the consequences of respite upon carers and care recipients are generally small, with better controlled studies finding modest benefits only for certain subgroups. However, many studies report high levels of carer satisfaction. No reliable evidence was found that respite can delay entry to residential care or that respite adversely affects care recipients. Randomisation validity in the included randomised studies was sometimes unclear. Studies reported many different outcome measures, and all of the quasi-experimental and uncontrolled studies had methodological weaknesses. The descriptions of the studies did not provide sufficient detail of the methods of data collection or analysis, and the studies failed to describe adequately the groups of study participants. In some studies, only evidence to support respite care services was presented, rather than a balanced view of the services. Only five economic evaluations of respite care services were found, all of which compared day care with usual care and only one study was undertaken in the UK. Day care tended to be associated with higher costs and either similar or a slight increase in benefits, relative to usual care. The economic evaluations were based on two randomised and three quasi-experimental studies, all of which were included in the effectiveness analysis. The majority of studies assessed health and social service use and cost, but inadequate reporting limits the potential for exploring applicability to the UK setting. No study included generic health-related quality of life measures, making cost-effectiveness comparisons with other healthcare programmes difficult. One study used sensitivity analysis to explore the robustness of the findings. Conclusions The literature review provides some evidence that respite for carers of frail elderly people may have a small positive effect upon carers in terms of burden and mental or physical health. Carers were generally very satisfied with respite. No reliable evidence was found that respite either benefits or adversely affects care recipients, or that it delays entry to residential care. Economic evidence suggests that day care is at least as costly as usual care. Pilot studies are needed to inform full-scale studies of respite in the UK.

Choice in the context of informal care-giving.

Abstract: Extending choice and control for social care service users is a central feature of current English policies. However, these have comparatively little to say about choice in relation to the informal carers of relatives, friends or older people who are disabled or sick. To explore the realities of choice as experienced by carers, the present paper reviews research published in English since 1985 about three situations in which carers are likely to face choices: receiving social services; the entry of an older person to long-term care; and combining paid work and care. Thirteen electronic databases were searched, covering both the health and social care fields. Databases included: ASSIA; IBSS; Social Care Online; ISI Web of Knowledge; Medline; HMIC; Sociological Abstracts; INGENTA; ZETOC; and the National Research Register. The search strategy combined terms that: (1) identified individuals with care-giving responsibilities; (2) identified people receiving help and support; and (3) described the process of interest (e.g. choice, decision-making and self-determination). The search identified comparatively few relevant studies, and so was supplemented by the findings from another recent review of empirical research on carers' choices about combining work and care. The research evidence suggests that carers' choices are shaped by two sets of factors: one relates to the nature of the care-giving relationship; and the second consists of wider organisational factors. A number of reasons may explain the invisibility of choice for carers in current policy proposals for increasing choice. In particular, it is suggested that underpinning conceptual models of the relationship between carers and formal service providers shape the extent to which carers can be offered choice and control on similar terms to service users. In particular, the exercise of choice by carers is likely to be highly problematic if it involves relinquishing some unpaid care-giving activities.

The impact of organisational culture on the delivery of person-centred care in services providing respite care and short breaks for people with dementia

Abstract: Ensuring the development and delivery of person-centred care in services providing respite care and short breaks for people with dementia and their carers has a number of challenges for health and social service providers This article explores the role of organisational culture in barriers and facilitators to person-centred dementia care As part of a mixed-methods study of respite care and short breaks for people with dementia and their carers, 49 telephone semi-structured interviews, two focus groups (N= 16) and five face-to-face in-depth interviews involving front-line staff and operational and strategic managers were completed in 2006-2007 Qualitative thematic analysis of transcripts identified five themes on aspects of organisational culture that are perceived to influence person-centred care: understandings of person-centred care, attitudes to service development, service priorities, valuing staff and solution-focused approaches Views of person-centred care expressed by participants, although generally positive, highlight a range of understandings about person-centred care Some organisations describe their service as being person-centred without the necessary cultural shift to make this a reality Participants highlighted resource constraints and the knowledge, attitudes and personal qualities of staff as a barrier to implementing person-centred care Leadership style, the way that managers' support and value staff and the management of risk were considered important influences Person-centred dementia care is strongly advocated by professional opinion leaders and is prescribed in policy documents This analysis suggests that person-centred dementia care is not strongly embedded in the organisational cultures of all local providers of respite-care and short-break services Provider organisations should be encouraged further to develop a shared culture at all levels of the organisation to ensure person-centred dementia care

Combining informal care and work: supporting carers in the workplace

Abstract: The UK Government is concerned that women and men who care for disabled or sick relatives, or elderly people, and who also wish to take part in paid work should have increased opportunities to do so. However, many informal carers find combining work and care difficult; some may ‘choose’ to give up paid employment completely. The present paper draws on the findings from two projects to explore the extent to which the needs of employees with caring responsibilities are supported in the workplace. The two projects examined evidence from a study of informal carers assessed under the 1995 Carers Act, identified the difficulties which they face in their workplace and observed the strategies which they developed to help sustain the two roles. From this, a model of support for working carers was developed which includes leave policies, carer-friendly working arrangements, access to a (private) telephone, and supportive line managers and co-workers. This support model was tested on the employment policies of 13 employers to see how ‘carer-friendly’ they were. Most of the organisations studied were able to provide appropriate support for carers identified in the model. Questions were then raised about different aspects of carer-friendly working arrangements, including whether carers should receive any special treatment that is not available to their colleagues, the role of line managers, and the relationship between seniority and opportunities to combine work and care.

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

Abstract: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.

Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

Abstract: This paper focuses on scoping studies, an approach to reviewing the literature which to date has received little attention in the research methods literature. We distinguish between different types of scoping studies and indicate where these stand in relation to full systematic reviews. We outline a framework for conducting a scoping study based on our recent experiences of reviewing the literature on services for carers for people with mental health problems. Where appropriate, our approach to scoping the field is contrasted with the procedures followed in systematic reviews. We emphasize how including a consultation exercise in this sort of study may enhance the results, making them more useful to policy makers, practitioners and service users. Finally, we consider the advantages and limitations of the approach and suggest that a wider debate is called for about the role of the scoping study in relation to other types of literature reviews.

PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

Abstract: Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.

Scoping studies: advancing the methodology

Abstract: Scoping studies are an increasingly popular approach to reviewing health research evidence. In 2005, Arksey and O'Malley published the first methodological framework for conducting scoping studies. While this framework provides an excellent foundation for scoping study methodology, further clarifying and enhancing this framework will help support the consistency with which authors undertake and report scoping studies and may encourage researchers and clinicians to engage in this process. We build upon our experiences conducting three scoping studies using the Arksey and O'Malley methodology to propose recommendations that clarify and enhance each stage of the framework. Recommendations include: clarifying and linking the purpose and research question (stage one); balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process (stage two); using an iterative team approach to selecting studies (stage three) and extracting data (stage four); incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis, reporting results, and considering the implications of study findings to policy, practice, or research (stage five); and incorporating consultation with stakeholders as a required knowledge translation component of scoping study methodology (stage six). Lastly, we propose additional considerations for scoping study methodology in order to support the advancement, application and relevance of scoping studies in health research. Specific recommendations to clarify and enhance this methodology are outlined for each stage of the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Continued debate and development about scoping study methodology will help to maximize the usefulness and rigor of scoping study findings within healthcare research and practice.

AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both

Abstract: The number of published systematic reviews of studies of healthcare interventions has increased rapidly and these are used extensively for clinical and policy decisions. Systematic reviews are subject to a range of biases and increasingly include non-randomised studies of interventions. It is important that users can distinguish high quality reviews. Many instruments have been designed to evaluate different aspects of reviews, but there are few comprehensive critical appraisal instruments. AMSTAR was developed to evaluate systematic reviews of randomised trials. In this paper, we report on the updating of AMSTAR and its adaptation to enable more detailed assessment of systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. With moves to base more decisions on real world observational evidence we believe that AMSTAR 2 will assist decision makers in the identification of high quality systematic reviews, including those based on non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions.