Home care is the preferred care option for most people who need support; yet abuse exists in these settings toward both home care workers and clients. There are no existing reviews that assess the scope of current research on abuse in home care, and tangentially related reviews are dated. For these reasons, a scoping review is warranted to map the current state of research on abuse in home care and examine current interventions in this field. Databases selected for searching were Medline and EMBASE on OVID, Scopus, and the following databases in EBSCOhost: Academic Search Complete, AgeLine, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Records were included if: (a) they were written in English; (b) the participants were home care workers or clients age 18 years or older; (c) they were published in journals; (d) they undertook empirical research; and (e) they were published within the last 10-year period. Following Graham et al. (2006), the 52 included articles are categorized as either knowledge inquiry or as intervention studies. We find three themes among knowledge inquiry studies: (1) prevalence and types of abuse in home care, (2) abuse in the context of living with dementia, and (3) working conditions and abuse. Analysis from the intervention studies suggest that not all organizations have specific policies and practices to prevent abuse, and no existing interventions to protect the well-being of clients were identified. Findings from this review can inform up-to-date practice and policymaking to improve the health and well-being of home care clients and workers.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The objectives of the present study are to answer the following questions: (1) What types of home-based interventions are currently being studied to prevent child neglect? (2) How effective are the different home-based interventions for preventing child neglect? (3) What are the causes of heterogeneity among included studies and their impact on study effects?

BACKGROUND: Several studies have identified how mistreatment during labour and childbirth can act as a barrier to the use of health facilities. Despite general agreement that respectful maternity care (RMC) is a fundamental human right, and an important component of quality intrapartum care that every pregnant woman should receive, the effectiveness of proposed policies remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of introducing RMC policies into health facilities providing intrapartum services. METHODS: We included randomized and non-randomized controlled studies evaluating the effectiveness of introducing RMC policies into health facilities. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS, AJOL, WHO RHL, and Popline, along with ongoing trials registers (ISRCT register, ICTRP register), and the White Ribbon Respectful Maternity Care Repository. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. FINDINGS: Five studies were included. All were undertaken in Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, Sudan, South Africa), and involved a range of components. Two were cluster RCTs, and three were before/after studies. In total, over 8000 women were included at baseline and over 7500 at the endpoints. Moderate certainty evidence suggested that RMC interventions increases women's experiences of respectful care (one cRCT, approx. 3000 participants; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.44, 95% CI 2.45-4.84); two observational studies also reported positive changes. Reports of good quality care increased. Experiences of disrespectful or abusive care, and, specifically, physical abuse, were reduced. Low certainty evidence indicated fewer accounts of non-dignified care, lack of privacy, verbal abuse, neglect and abandonment with RMC interventions, but no difference in satisfaction rates. Other than low certainty evidence of reduced episiotomy rates, there were no data on the pre-specified clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Multi-component RMC policies appear to reduce women's overall experiences of disrespect and abuse, and some components of this experience. However, the sustainability of the demonstrated effect over time is unclear, and the elements of the programmes that have most effect have not been examined. While the tested RMC policies show promising results, there is a need for rigorous research to refine the optimum approach to deliver and achieve RMC in all settings.

BACKGROUND: Internet interventions are assumed to be cost-effective. However, it is unclear how strong this evidence is, and what the quality of this evidence is. METHOD: A comprehensive literature search (1990-2014) in Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluations Database, NHS Health Technology Assessment Database, Office of Health Economics Evaluations Database, Compendex and Inspec was conducted. We included economic evaluations alongside randomized controlled trials of Internet interventions for a range of mental health symptoms compared to a control group, consisting of a psychological or pharmaceutical intervention, treatment-as-usual (TAU), wait-list or an attention control group. RESULTS: Of the 6587 abstracts identified, 16 papers met the inclusion criteria. Nine studies featured a societal perspective. Results demonstrated that guided Internet interventions for depression, anxiety, smoking cessation and alcohol consumption had favourable probabilities of being more cost-effective when compared to wait-list, TAU, group cognitive behaviour therapy (CBGT), attention control, telephone counselling or unguided Internet CBT. Unguided Internet interventions for suicide prevention, depression and smoking cessation demonstrated cost-effectiveness compared to TAU or attention control. In general, results from cost-utility analyses using more generic health outcomes (quality of life) were less favourable for unguided Internet interventions. Most studies adhered reasonably to economic guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Results of guided Internet interventions being cost-effective are promising with most studies adhering to publication standards, but more economic evaluations are needed in order to determine cost-effectiveness of Internet interventions compared to the most cost-effective treatment currently available