Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40808899›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2025

Precaution or barrier? Reconsidering contact and isolation measures in palliative care: a systematic scoping review.

Henry T He, Shannon Bunn, Brittany Rance

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Henry T HeDivision of Palliative Care, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4803-6195
Shannon BunnDivision of Palliative Care, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Brittany RanceDivision of Palliative Care, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Infection control measures like contact precautions may conflict with patient-centered palliative care principles, but their efficacy and harms in this context remain understudied. This review evaluates how contact precautions affect quality of life, social connectedness, and infection control efficacy in palliative care. Design: Systematic scoping review. Setting: Palliative care settings (eg, palliative care units and hospices). Participants: Adults and children receiving palliative care, with no restrictions on age or comorbidity. Methods: English-language studies on contact precautions in palliative care were included. Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid Embase were searched from inception to December 20, 2024, using terms related to antimicrobial resistance, contact precautions, and palliative care. No publication type or status restrictions were applied. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework and followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Results: Fifteen studies were included, primarily from Germany (73%) and using qualitative methods (80%). Most focused on patients in palliative care units or hospices, though geographic and methodological limitations restrict generalizability. Common challenges included fear, loneliness, disrupted intimacy, and inconsistent protocols. Contact precautions were often bundled with other infection prevention interventions, limiting the ability to assess their specific impact. Terminology varied widely. No study directly evaluated the efficacy of contact precautions in reducing antimicrobial-resistant organism (ARO) transmission, though one pediatric study reported liberal protocols and no nosocomial ARO infections. Conclusions: A case-by-case approach is needed to balance infection control with patient dignity and quality of life. Consistent terminology and more robust, mixed-methods research are essential to inform evidence-based protocols in diverse settings.

Identifiers

PMID40808899
PMCPMC12345051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.