Conectar
Childhood obesity is an escalating crisis in the United States. Health policy may impact this epidemic which disproportionally affects underserved populations.
The aim was to use the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to assess health policy impact on preventing or treating school-aged children (5 > 18 years) with obesity in underserved populations.
A scoping review of 842 articles was conducted. Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction.
Twelve studies included subgroup analysis, with four suggesting an impact of policy on at-risk groups. None of the 24 studies fully applied the RE-AIM framework. Policies positively impacted childhood obesity in 12 studies across the sample.
Our review revealed inconsistent evidence for the effectiveness of policy on childhood obesity, perhaps due to the lack of focus on the social determinants of health. In addition, many studies did not evaluate the outcomes for underserved populations. Therefore, we propose more attention to social determinants in future legislation and evaluation of policy effectiveness on underserved populations. Findings identify an urgent need for the design, implementation, and evaluation of policies specifically directed to address the inequities of racism, social injustices, and social determinants of health that impact childhood obesity in the United States. Future work needs to identify who was reached by the policy, who benefitted from the policy, and how policies were implemented to address obesity-related health disparities. Nurses should advocate for the evaluation of childhood obesity policies, particularly in underserved populations, to determine effectiveness. Nurses, particularly those trained in population and community health and research, should advocate for policy research that considers inequities rather than controls for these variables. Multi-layered interventions can then be tailored to sub-populations and evaluated more effectively.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, many registered nurses (RNs) worked on the frontline caring for severely ill patients. They did so with limited knowledge of how to treat and prevent the disease. This extreme situation puts pressure on RNs to find evidence on which to base the care of their patients.
To examine: (1) the extent to which evidence-based practice (EBP) process was applied by Swedish RN cohorts 15–19 years after graduation during the pandemic, (2) whether there was any change to their EBP process from pre-pandemic to late pandemic, (3) the relationship between RNs' use of the EBP process and the duration of exposure to work situations severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and (4) whether level of education, position and care setting were associated with the extent of RNs' EBP process.
In 2021, the level of EBP activities was investigated among 2237 RNs 15–19 years after graduation. The scale used to measure EBP consisted of six items of the EBP process. Unpaired t-tests or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used in the analysis.
RNs used the EBP process to a moderate extent to inform and transform their clinical practice. There was a minor but significant decrease in practicing the EBP process from pre-pandemic to late in the pandemic. RNs who were most affected by the pandemic scored higher on the scale than less-affected colleagues. RNs in nonclinical positions reported more EBP activities, as did RNs in management positions. RNs working in outpatient settings reported more EBP activities than their colleagues in hospitals.
It is imperative that RNs hone their skills in EBP if they are to be prepared for future healthcare crises. Healthcare providers have a duty to facilitate the development of EBP and, in this regard, RNs in clinical positions in hospitals need particular support.
It has been suggested that nursing shift-to-shift handover should be a more team-based dialogue with and for the patient rather than about a patient.
The aim of this study was to evaluate patient participation in relation to the implementation of the person-centered handover (PCH).
A pretest–posttest design was used without a comparison group, including patients from nine units in a university hospital at pretest (n = 228) and after implementing PCH (posttest, n = 253) per the framework integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services. The PCH is inspired by an Australian bedside handover model. The Patient Preferences for the Patient Participation tool was used to rate the preference for and experience of participation on 12 items, combined into three levels of preference-based participation (insufficient–fair–sufficient).
There were no differences regarding experience or preference-based participation between patients at pretest–posttest; however, posttest patients experienced participation in the item Reciprocal communication to a lesser extent than the pretest patients. Only 49% of the posttest group received PCH; of those not receiving PCH, some would have wanted PCH (27%), while some would have declined (24%). Patients receiving PCH had sufficient participation (82%), to a greater extent, regarding the item Sharing one's symptoms with staff than patients at pretest (72%). Patients receiving PCH also had sufficient participation, to a greater extent, than patients at posttest who did not receive, but would have wanted PCH, regarding four items: (1) sharing one's symptoms with staff, (2) reciprocal communication, (3) being told what was done, and (4) taking part in planning.
Most patients want to be present at PCH. Therefore, nurses should ask for the patients' preferences regarding PCH and act accordingly. Not inviting patients who want PCH could contribute to insufficient patient participation. Further studies are needed to capture what assistance nurses would want in identifying and acting in alignment with patient preferences.
FreshRSS 