METHODS: We systematically searched 12 online databases for qualitative studies exploring the experiences of older adults aged 60 years and above on their decision to self-regulate their driving. Thematic synthesis was performed to identify elements influencing driving reduction and cessation. The confidence profile of each findings from the meta-synthesis was appraised using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) tool.
RESULTS: A total of 17 studies representing views of 712 older adults from four countries were included. Three major themes were identified with each representing a transition phase that can either facilitate or hinder older drivers from ceasing completely or reducing their driving, when transitioning from pre-decision phase to post-cessation phase.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that there is a mismatch between the current traffic collation prevention measures, such as age-specific mandatory license renewal system and travel needs of older adults. As such, it is time for the authorities, researchers, and public from various fields and perspectives to collaborate, sustain, and improve safety and mobility in older adults. Practical applications: Adequate regulations and guidelines from the medical community and legal authorities are warranted to assist older adults and caregivers. Social support (e.g., feedback, assurance, or transportation support) from family members, friends, and healthcare professionals are crucial for a smooth transition. Provision of alternative transportations in rural areas are needed and future interventions should focus on engaging and educating older adults to consider alternative transportation modes for mobility. Age-specific mandatory license renewal procedure can be useful in screening for at-risk groups.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: We included all prospective controlled studies (randomised and non-randomised) comparing rooming-in to nursery care that reported full or partial breastfeeding up to six months. We used the 2016 search results of the Cochrane review and updated the search to August 2018 using OVID MEDLINE. Duplicate data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were performed. Meta-analyses were performed using REVMAN 5. The GRADE approach was used to assess quality of evidence. Seven studies were included, five had 24-hour-per-day, one daytime only and one 8-hours-per-day rooming-in. Four studies had at least one additional co-intervention: Differences in delivery room management, and educational packages. All studies contributing to meta-analyses had 24-hour rooming-in. There was no difference in the proportion of infants on full breastfeeding at 3 months (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.54; very-low-quality evidence), 4 months (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.33; very-low-quality evidence) and 6 months (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.58; low-quality evidence). The proportion of infants on partial breastfeeding at 3-4 months was higher with rooming-in (RR 1.31; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.61; very-low-quality evidence).
CONCLUSION: The addition of non-randomised prospective controlled studies to existing evidence did not add further information on the effects of rooming-in on breastfeeding duration but resulted in lower quality of evidence. Uncertainty about the effects of rooming-in on breastfeeding duration remains.