This scoping review aimed to map studies on behaviour change interventions that address antibiotic treatment-seeking behaviour for respiratory tract infections in primary and community care settings.

This review is based on the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

A literature search in January 2024 and May 2024 was performed across Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, EThOS and Google Scholar was performed.

Eligible studies described behaviour change interventions in primary and community care settings, published from 2000 onward across all countries.

Descriptive data relating to study details and intervention functions were gathered and organised according to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour change framework in a predeveloped data extraction sheet. Dual data extraction occurred, and inter-rater reliability results are reported (K=0.83).

The scoping review identified 38 eligible studies, which consisted of randomised controlled trials (7/38), cluster randomised controlled trials (6/38), randomised experiments (5/38), cross-sectional studies (5/38), qualitative investigations (5/38) and quasi-experimental designs (4/38). Most interventions focused on educational resources (15/38), digital tools (7/38) and community campaigns (6/38), with fewer targeting decision-making processes (4/38) or psychological drivers of antibiotic-seeking behaviour (3/38). Only one study was conducted in low-income and middle-income countries, and only one separately assessed behaviour change as a measured outcome.

This scoping review highlights a wide range of research methodologies within the topic area. There was some limited evidence of intervention efficacy for antibiotic prescription rates, particularly interventions focused on enhancing knowledge and access to resources. However, more emphasis is needed on standardising outcome measures and evaluating long-term outcomes.

This study aims to determine key workforce variables (demographic, health and occupational) that predicted National Health Service (NHS) staff’s absence due to illness and expressed intention to leave their current profession.

Staff from 18 NHS Trusts were surveyed between April 2020 and January 2021, and again approximately 12 months later.

Logistic and linear regression were used to explore relationships between baseline exposures and four 12-month outcomes: absence due to COVID-19, absence due to non-COVID-19 illness, actively seeking employment outside current profession and regularly thinking about leaving current profession.

22 555 participants (out of a possible 152 286 employees; 15%) completed the baseline questionnaire. 10 831 participants completed the short follow-up questionnaire at 12 months and 5868 also completed the long questionnaire; these participants were included in the analyses of sickness absence and intention to leave, respectively. 20% of participants took 5+ days of work absence for non-COVID-19 sickness in the 12 months between baseline and 12-month questionnaire; 14% took 5+ days of COVID-19-related sickness absence. At 12 months, 20% agreed or strongly agreed they were actively seeking employment outside their current profession; 24% thought about leaving their profession at least several times per week. Sickness absence (COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 related) and intention to leave the profession (actively seeking another role and thinking about leaving) were all more common among NHS staff who were younger, in a COVID-19 risk group, had a probable mental health disorder, and who did not feel supported by colleagues and managers.

Several factors affected both workforce retention and sickness absence. Of particular interest are the impact of colleague and manager support because they are modifiable. The NHS workforce is likely to benefit from training managers to speak with and support staff, especially those experiencing mental health difficulties. Further, staff should be given sufficient opportunities to form and foster social connections. Selection bias may have affected the presented results.

There have been previous initiatives to identify key performance indicators (KPIs) for continuous kidney replacement therapy. However, no formal reviews of the evidence for KPIs of intermittent kidney replacement therapy (IKRT) have been conducted. This systematic review will appraise the evidence for KPIs of IKRT in critically ill patients and is part of the DIALYZING WISELY (NCT05186636) programme which aims to improve the performance of acute renal replacement therapy in intensive care units by aligning local practices with evidence-based best practices.

Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library will be searched for studies involving KPIs for IKRT. Grey literature will also be searched and include technical reports, practice guidelines and conference proceedings as well as websites of relevant organisations. We will search the Agency of Healthcare Research and National Quality Measures Clearinghouse for IKRT-related KPIs. Studies will be included if they contain KPIs, occur in critically ill patients and are associated with IKRT. We will evaluate the risk of bias using the modified Cochrane tool and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology. The analysis will be primarily descriptive. Each KPI will be evaluated for importance, scientific acceptability, usability and feasibility using the four criteria proposed by the United States Strategic Framework Board for a National Quality Measurement and Reporting System. Finally, KPIs will be appraised for potential operational characteristics, potential to be integrated into electronic medical records, adoptability by stakeholders and affordability, if applicable.

Ethics approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. Findings of this review will be disseminated through peer-related publication.

CRD42022074444.