Skip to main content

Table 3 ConQual summary of findings

From: Perspectives of older adults, caregivers, healthcare providers on frailty screening in primary care: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

Systematic review title: Perspectives of older adults, caregivers, healthcare providers on frailty screening in primary care: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

Population: older adults, caregivers, and healthcare providers

Phenomena of interest: the perception of frailty screening

Context: in primary care

Synthesized finding

Type of research

Dependability

Credibility

ConQual score

Capacity of healthcare providers and older adults

It is important to recognize that stakeholders’ capability exerts influence on the implementation of frailty screening. Need education, training, enablement to improve healthcare professionals’ knowledge and skills, and further the perception of frailty in the elderly

Qualitative

Downgrade

1 levela

remains unchanged

Moderate

Opportunity in the implementation of frailty screening

It must be noted that opportunity is an essential factor influencing the implementation of frailty screening. An awareness of the factors that reduce opportunities to implement frailty screening, including lack of a proper tool and lack of a clarity implementation pathway, is important. Moreover, a sensitive implementation approach and communication are conducive to creating a trusting relationship, and it can facilitate participation in frailty screening among older adults. Involving the multidisciplinary team can also promote the implementation of screening

Qualitative

Downgrade

1 levela

Downgrade

1 levelb

Low

Motivation in the implementation of frailty screening

Healthcare providers’ positive attitude and the belief in the benefits of screening facilitate the implementation. Factors that hinder the implementation include the lack of supportive evidence of screening effectiveness, older adults’ fear of frailty, and doubt about community insufficient resources

Qualitative

Downgrade

1 levela

remains unchanged

Moderate

  1. aDowngraded one level due to common dependability issues across the included primary studies (the majority of studies did not present a statement locating the researcher culturally or theoretically, and there was no acknowledgment of their influence on the research)
  2. bDowngraded one level to a mix of unequivocal and credible findings