You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Gastroenterology and hepatology
Protocol
Hepatitis C virus infection and hospital-related outcomes: a systematic review protocol
  1. Lianping Ti1,2,
  2. Michelle Ng2,
  3. Lindila Awendila1,
  4. Patrizia Maria Carrieri3
  1. 1 British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, St. Paul’s Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  2. 2 Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, St. Paul’s Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  3. 3 Faculté de Médecine, Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France
  1. Correspondence to Dr Lianping Ti; mintti{at}cfenet.ubc.ca

Abstract

Introduction People living with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are disproportionately over-represented in the healthcare system due to various individual and contextual circumstances, including comorbidities and socioeconomic marginalisation. With growing trends in morbidity and mortality related to HCV infection, HCV is becoming a significant health and financial burden on the healthcare system, particularly in acute hospital settings. It is noteworthy that with the advent of direct-acting antiviral therapy the increasing number of patients who are cured of HCV could potentially result in different patterns of hospital-related outcomes over time.

Methods and analysis We will conduct a systematic review of published literature to retrieve quantitative research articles pertaining to hospital outcomes among patients living with HCV. Primary outcomes include hospitalisation rates, length of stay, leaving against medical advice, readmission and in-hospital mortality. In total, five databases will be searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science). Titles, abstracts and full texts will be independently reviewed by two investigators in three separate stages. The methodological quality of included quantitative research studies will be assessed using a validated tool. Data from included articles will be extracted using a standardised form and synthesised in a narrative account.

Ethics and dissemination Results of this systematic review could provide a better understanding on how to optimise health systems and services to improve patient outcomes and care. The results of this study may provide future research with a foundation to guide decision-making and for designing and implementing systems-level interventions to improve treatment and care delivery for people living with HCV. Ethical approval for this study was received by the University of British Columbia/Providence Health Care Research Ethics Board. Findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, presentations, reports and community forums

PROSPERO registration number CRD42017081082; Pre-results.

  • hepatitis C virus
  • hospital
  • acute care
  • protocol
  • systematic review

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021118

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors LT led the development of the protocol and planned and designed the systematic review protocol. LT prepared the first draft. MN, LA and PMC reviewed and critically revised the first and successive draft of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

    • Funding LT is supported by a Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research (MSFHR) Scholar Award.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent Not required.

    • Ethics approval The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of University Hospital of Larissa.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.