Oral and dental manifestations of scleroderma are extremely common, yet they are often overlooked within rheumatology and poorly understood within dentistry. Previous research has indicated the need to understand the oral and dental experiences of people living with scleroderma and those involved in their care. This scoping review aims, for the first time, to comprehensively map what is known regarding the identification and management of oral and dental manifestations of scleroderma, how these are experienced by people living with scleroderma, and to explore key characteristics of barriers and enablers to good oral and dental care in scleroderma. A scoping review was conducted using six databases (Embase, PubMed, PsychINFO, ASSIA, Scopus and SSCI), according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses - extension for Scoping Review. Grey literature was also included. Studies were eligible for inclusion if the full text and abstract were available in English, published between 2002 and 2022, and focused on the concept of oral and dental care in adults with scleroderma, either relating to identification and management, enablers and barriers to best practice, or patient experiences and well-being. Qualitative research which seeks to understand patients\' lived experiences was a notable gap in the literature. Similarly, there was a significant lack of focus on the oral and dental manifestations of scleroderma in rheumatology. Three key features were identified which would facilitate best practice in research and clinical contexts: the necessity of multidisciplinary care; the necessity of centralising patient experience; and the necessity of mitigating barriers to dental care. We conclude that increased awareness of scleroderma within dentistry and streamlining referral procedures between the disciplines of dentistry and rheumatology, to enable the early identification and management of scleroderma, are crucial.

Near Real-Time Feedback (NRTF) on the patient\'s experience with care, coupled with data relay to providers, can inform quality-of-care improvements, including at the point of care. The objective is to systematically review contemporary literature on the impact of the use of NRTF and data relay to providers on standardized patient experience measures. Six scientific databases and five specialty journals were searched supplemented by snowballing search strategies, according to the registered study protocol. Eligibility included studies in English (2015-2023) assessing the impact of NRTF and data relay on standardized patient-reported experience measures as a primary outcome. Eligibility and quality appraisals were performed by two independent reviewers. An expert former patient (Patient and Family Advisory Council and communication sciences background) helped interpret the results. Eight papers met review eligibility criteria, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one non-randomized study. Three of these studies involved in-person NRTF prior to data relay (patient-level data for immediate corrective action or aggregated and peer-compared) and led to significantly better results in all or some of the experience measures. In turn, a kiosk-based NRTF achieved no better experience results. The remaining studies were pre-post designs with mixed or neutral results and greater risks of bias. In-person NRTF on the patient experience followed by rapid data relay to their providers, either patient-level or provider-level as peer-compared, can improve the patient experience of care. Reviewed kiosk-based or self-reported approaches combined with data relay were not effective. Further research should determine which approach (e.g. who conducts the in-person NRTF) will provide better, more efficient improvements and under which circumstances.

OBJECTIVE: Prior work identified 6 key value elements (attributes of treatment and desired outcomes) for individuals living with major depressive disorder (MDD) in managing their condition: mode of treatment, time to treatment helpfulness, MDD relief, quality of work, interaction with others, and affordability. The objective of our study was to identify whether previous cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) for MDD treatment addressed any of these value elements. A secondary objective was to identify whether any study engaged patients, family members, and caregivers in the model development process.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review to identify published model-based CEAs. We compared the elements of the published studies with the MDD patient value elements elicited in prior work to identify gaps and areas for future research.
RESULTS: Of 86 published CEAs, we found that 7 included patient out-of-pocket costs, and 32 included measures of productivity, which were both priorities for individuals with MDD. We found that only 2 studies elicited measures from patients for their model, and 2 studies engaged patients in the modeling process.
CONCLUSIONS: Published CEA models for MDD treatment do not regularly include value elements that are a priority for this patient population nor do they include patients in their modeling process. Flexible models that can accommodate elements consistent with patient experience are needed, and a multistakeholder engagement approach would help accomplish this.

BACKGROUND: Recovery Colleges (RCs) represent an approach to enhancing mental wellbeing through education, lived experience and co-production. Despite their increasing presence, scant literature explores the operationalisation of RCs and their embodiment of co-production principles. The aim of this scoping review was to investigate the operationalisation of RCs and their application of co-production in RCs located in high-income countries over the past decade.
METHODS: Employing an established scoping review methodology, searches were conducted across seven academic databases. Ten primary studies met the inclusion criteria. In addition, stakeholders were consulted to validate themes and uncover knowledge gaps.
RESULTS: Findings suggest that RCs are inherently idiosyncratic, adapted to suit local contexts. Discussions persist regarding their optimal institutional contexts and positioning and the interpretation of key terms such as \'recovery\' and \'co-production\', influencing daily operations and stakeholder involvement. Challenges surrounding measuring success against fidelity criteria underscore the need for a broader understanding of RC value and sustainability.
CONCLUSIONS: This review offers a synopsis of the existing literature offering insights concerning the operationalisation of RCs. Through a synthesis of diverse primary studies, it systematically identifies and describes the operational nuances within the RC landscape and the fundamental elements underpinning RC operations, while shedding light on critical knowledge gaps in both research and practice. SO WHAT?: This review underscores the importance of a broader understanding of RC value and sustainability, offering insights for both research and practice in the field of mental health and wellbeing. This review highlights the significance of further exploration and refinement of RC operationalisation to enhance their effectiveness and impact in supporting mental wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: Patient and staff experience is a vital factor to consider in the evaluation of remote patient monitoring (RPM) interventions. However, no comprehensive overview of available RPM patient and staff experience-measuring methods and tools exists.
OBJECTIVE: This review aimed at obtaining a comprehensive set of experience constructs and corresponding measuring instruments used in contemporary RPM research and at proposing an initial set of guidelines for improving methodological standardization in this domain.
METHODS: Full-text papers reporting on instances of patient or staff experience measuring in RPM interventions, written in English, and published after January 1, 2011, were considered for eligibility. By \"RPM interventions,\" we referred to interventions including sensor-based patient monitoring used for clinical decision-making; papers reporting on other kinds of interventions were therefore excluded. Papers describing primary care interventions, involving participants under 18 years of age, or focusing on attitudes or technologies rather than specific interventions were also excluded. We searched 2 electronic databases, Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE, on February 12, 2021.We explored and structured the obtained corpus of data through correspondence analysis, a multivariate statistical technique.
RESULTS: In total, 158 papers were included, covering RPM interventions in a variety of domains. From these studies, we reported 546 experience-measuring instances in RPM, covering the use of 160 unique experience-measuring instruments to measure 120 unique experience constructs. We found that the research landscape has seen a sizeable growth in the past decade, that it is affected by a relative lack of focus on the experience of staff, and that the overall corpus of collected experience measures can be organized in 4 main categories (service system related, care related, usage and adherence related, and health outcome related). In the light of the collected findings, we provided a set of 6 actionable recommendations to RPM patient and staff experience evaluators, in terms of both what to measure and how to measure it. Overall, we suggested that RPM researchers and practitioners include experience measuring as part of integrated, interdisciplinary data strategies for continuous RPM evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS: At present, there is a lack of consensus and standardization in the methods used to measure patient and staff experience in RPM, leading to a critical knowledge gap in our understanding of the impact of RPM interventions. This review offers targeted support for RPM experience evaluators by providing a structured, comprehensive overview of contemporary patient and staff experience measures and a set of practical guidelines for improving research quality and standardization in this domain.

BACKGROUND: Homelessness is associated with significant health disparities. Conventional health services often fail to address the unique needs and lived experience of homeless individuals and fail to include participatory design when planning health services. This scoping review aimed to examine areas of patient experience that are most frequently reported by people experiencing homelessness when seeking and receiving healthcare, and to identify existing surveys used to measure patient experience for this cohort.
METHODS: A scoping review was undertaken reported according to the PRISMA-ScR 2020 Statement. Databases were searched on 1 December 2022: MEDLINE, EMBASE, APA PsychINFO and CINAHL. Included studies focused on people experiencing homelessness, healthcare services and patient experience, primary research, published in English from 2010. Qualitative papers and findings were extracted and synthesized against a modified framework based on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines for care for people experiencing homelessness, the Institute of Medicine Framework and Lachman\'s multidimensional quality model. People with lived experience of homelessness were employed as part of the research team.
RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included. Of these, 22 were qualitative, seven quantitative and three mixed methods, from the United States of America (n = 17), United Kingdom (n = 5), Australia (n = 5) and Canada (n = 4). Health services ranged from primary healthcare to outpatient management, acute care, emergency care and hospital based healthcare. In qualitative papers, the domains of \'accessible and timely\', \'person-centred\', and values of \'dignity and respect\' and \'kindness with compassion\' were most prevalent. Among the three patient experience surveys identified, \'accessible and timely\' and \'person-centred\' were the most frequent domains. The least frequently highlighted domains and values were \'equitable\' and \'holistic\'. No questions addressed the \'safety\' domain.
CONCLUSIONS: The Primary Care Quality-Homeless questionnaire best reflected the priorities for healthcare provision that were highlighted in the qualitative studies of people experiencing homelessness. The most frequently cited domains and values that people experiencing homelessness expressed as important when seeking healthcare were reflected in each of the three survey tools to varying degrees. Findings suggest that the principles of \'Kindness and compassion\' require further emphasis when seeking feedback on healthcare experiences and the domains of \'safety\', \'equitable\', and \'efficiency\' are not adequately represented in existing patient experience surveys.

UNASSIGNED: Bone-anchored prostheses (BAP) are an advanced reconstructive surgical approach for individuals who had transfemoral amputation and are unable to use the conventional socket-suspension systems for their prostheses. Access to this technology has been limited in part due to the lag between the start of a new procedure and the availability of evidence that is required before making decisions about widespread provision. This systematic review presents as a single resource up-to-date information on aspects most relevant to decision makers, i.e., clinical efficacy, safety parameters, patient experiences, and health economic outcomes of this technology.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic search of the literature was conducted by an information specialist in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, the Core Collection of Web of Science, CADTH\'s Grey Matters, and Google Scholar up until May 31, 2023. Peer-reviewed original research articles on the outcomes of clinical effectiveness (health-related quality of life, mobility, and prosthesis usage), complications and adverse events, patient experiences, and health economic outcomes were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence and ROBINS-I, as appropriate.
UNASSIGNED: Fifty studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 12 were excluded. Thirty-eight studies were finally included in this review, of which 21 reported on clinical outcomes and complications, 9 case series and 1 cohort study focused specifically on complications and adverse events, and 2 and 5 qualitative studies reported on patient experience and health economic assessments, respectively. The most common study design is a single-arm trial (pre-/post-intervention design) with varying lengths of follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: The clinical efficacy of this technology is evident in selected populations. Overall, patients reported increased health-related quality of life, mobility, and prosthesis usage post-intervention. The most common complication is a superficial or soft-tissue infection, and more serious complications are rare. Patient-reported experiences have generally been positive. Evidence indicates that bone-anchored implants for prosthesis fixation are cost-effective for those individuals who face significant challenges in using socket-suspension systems, although they may offer no additional advantage to those who are functioning well with their socket-suspended prostheses.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain a deeper understanding of peoples\' experiences of cancer treatments with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).
BACKGROUND: ICIs are transforming survival outcomes for many with certain advanced cancers. Given the possibility of unique immune-related adverse events (irAEs), understanding treatment experiences is crucial to identify support needs and provide safe and effective person-centred care.
METHODS: A systematic review of qualitative research and thematic synthesis. To report this review, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Analysis and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) checklist and Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) guidance have been used.
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science databases were searched in January 2022 for eligible studies published in English from database inception.
METHODS: Two reviewers independently screened records, identified papers for inclusion and appraised methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Themes were developed using thematic synthesis.
RESULTS: Eighteen papers were included and three analytical themes developed: immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment decision-making; the experience and impact of immune checkpoint inhibitor treatments; and appraising and responding to irAEs.
CONCLUSIONS: The synthesis renders visible individuals\' unmet information, psychological and practical support needs. It identifies shortcomings in immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment decision-making processes and highlights the need for healthcare professionals to recognise and sensitively handle individuals\' treatment expectations. Individuals\' understandings of and responses to irAEs are also illustrated, and attention drawn to patients\' concerns about healthcare professionals\' checkpoint inhibitor and irAEs knowledge.
CONCLUSIONS: To sensitively manage treatment expectations and uncertainties, and optimise health outcomes, there are distinct points in treatment trajectories where care and support might require adapting and enhancing.
CONCLUSIONS: This review addresses people\'s experiences of immune checkpoint inhibitor treatments. The core findings reveal unmet information, psychological and practical support needs. Insights derived from this review will enhance individuals\' experiences and outcomes and healthcare professionals\' practice.
UNASSIGNED: No patient or public involvement.

Subcutaneous (SC) injections can be associated with local pain and discomfort that is subjective and may affect treatment adherence and overall patient experience. With innovations increasingly focused on finding ways to deliver higher doses and volumes (≥2 mL), there is a need to better understand the multiple intertwined factors that influence pain upon SC injection. As a priority for the SC Drug Development & Delivery Consortium, this manuscript provides a comprehensive review of known attributes from published literature that contribute to pain/discomfort upon SC injection from three perspectives: (1) device and delivery factors that cause physical pain, (2) formulation factors that trigger pain responses, and (3) human factors impacting pain perception. Leveraging the Consortium\'s collective expertise, we provide an assessment of the comparative and interdependent factors likely to impact SC injection pain. In addition, we offer expert insights and future perspectives to fill identified gaps in knowledge to help advance the development of patient-centric and well tolerated high-dose/high-volume SC drug delivery solutions.

BACKGROUND: Patients often mention distress, anxiety, or claustrophobia related to MRI, resulting in no-shows, disturbances of the workflow, and lasting psychological effects. Patients\' experience varies and is moderated by socio-demographic aspects alongside the clinical condition. While qualitative studies help understand individuals\' experiences, to date a systematic review and aggregation of MRI individuals\' experience is lacking.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate how adult patients experience MRI, and the characterizing factors.
METHODS: Systematic review with meta-aggregation and meta-synthesis.
METHODS: 220 patients\' reported experience of adults undergoing clinical MRI and 144 quotes from eight qualitative studies.
RESULTS: Systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycInfo databases according to the PRISMA guidelines. For quality appraisal, the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tools were used. Convergent segregated approach was undertaken.
METHODS: Participant recruitment, setting of exploration, type of interview, and analysis extracted through Joana Briggs Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI QARI) tool. Meta-synthesis was supported by a concept map. For meta-aggregation, direct patient quotes were extracted, findings grouped, themes and characterizing factors at each stage abstracted, and categories coded in two cycles. Frequency of statements was quantified. Interviews\' raw data unavailability impeded computer-aided analysis.
RESULTS: Eight articles out of 12,755 initial studies, 220 patients, were included. Meta-aggregation of 144 patient quotes answered: (1) experiences before, at the scanning table, during, and after an MRI, (2) differences based on clinical condition, and (3) characterizing factors, including coping strategies, look-and-feel of medical technology, interaction with professionals, and information. Seven publications lack participants\' health literacy level, occupation, and eight studies lack developmental conditions, ethnicity, or country of origin. Six studies were conducted in university hospitals.
CONCLUSIONS: Aggregation of patients\' quotes provide a foundational description of adult patients\' MRI experience across the stages of an MRI process. Insufficient raw data of individual quotes and limited socio-demographic diversity may constrain the understanding of individual experience and characterizing factors.
METHODS: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.