7 research outputs found

    The relationships between golf and health:A scoping review

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationships between golf and health. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Published and unpublished reports of any age or language, identified by searching electronic databases, platforms, reference lists, websites and from consulting experts. REVIEW METHODS: A 3-step search strategy identified relevant published primary and secondary studies as well as grey literature. Identified studies were screened for final inclusion. Data were extracted using a standardised tool, to form (1) a descriptive analysis and (2) a thematic summary. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: 4944 records were identified with an initial search. 301 studies met criteria for the scoping review. Golf can provide moderate intensity physical activity and is associated with physical health benefits that include improved cardiovascular, respiratory and metabolic profiles, and improved wellness. There is limited evidence related to golf and mental health. The incidence of golfing injury is moderate, with back injuries the most frequent. Accidental head injuries are rare, but can have serious consequences. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners and policymakers can be encouraged to support more people to play golf, due to associated improved physical health and mental well-being, and a potential contribution to increased life expectancy. Injuries and illnesses associated with golf have been identified, and risk reduction strategies are warranted. Further research priorities include systematic reviews to further explore the cause and effect nature of the relationships described. Research characterising golf's contribution to muscular strengthening, balance and falls prevention as well as further assessing the associations and effects between golf and mental health are also indicated

    Quality Assurance and the Service Domain in Cardiac and Pulmonary Rehabilitation

    No full text
    Background: Little is known about the quality assurance methods used on cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation. Also, little is known as to what extent the service domain is evaluated and what methods are employed. Knowledge of what is being done in these regards may facilitate programs effectively and efficiently measuring these outcomes. Methods: A survey was mailed to 1/3 of the programs (approximately 400) in both cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation listed in the AACVPR Program Guide 2004. The survey included questions that would add to the knowledge of what is the extent of practice and methods. 12 components of quality assurance were listed and 14 components of patient satisfaction were assessed as to the frequency of use. It was pilot tested and revised. Results: The usable return rate was 48%. Program directors of both types of programs claimed daily formal assessment of most of the 12 areas listed for quality assurance. The three highest being assessment of adverse events, safety, and patient satisfaction. The three lowest use was in the area of efficiency, timeliness and continuity of care. The service domain was assessed as comparable to the other three: health, clinical and behavioral domains. Patient satisfaction was the most commonly assessed component of the service domain with more than 90% of both types of programs measuring program effectiveness, overall program quality and friendliness of the staff. Managers most commonly cited the acquisition of new equipment as the endpoint as the end results of patient satisfaction assessment. Conclusions: There was surprising similarity in results from programs in cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation. Quality assurance is very frequently assessed in both. Concern for adverse events, safety, and patient satisfaction predominate
    corecore