Conectar
To explore the existing literature on delirium within the acute care setting from the family members' perspective and summarise key findings.
A scoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework and refined by the Joanna Briggs Institute.
The Population, Concept, and Context framework recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute's scoping review protocol identified the main concepts in the primary review question. The inclusion criteria focused on primary research studies from any chronological date that explored the family members' experience of delirium within the acute care setting. Following screening by two independent reviewers, data extraction was conducted and presented in tabular form, detailing the study aim, sample, setting, methods, key findings and recommendations for future research and clinical practice.
A comprehensive search was conducted in January 2025 using CINAHL+, MEDLINE, JBI, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Citation searching and reference lists supplemented this review to identify relevant studies.
Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Families' experiences of delirium were categorised into (1) lack of awareness and understanding of delirium; (2) communication and informational needs of family members regarding delirium; (3) the emotional impact delirium has on family members, and (4) family desire to participate in their loved one's care.
This review highlighted a paucity of literature addressing the experiences of family members who witness delirium in the acute care setting. The existing research underscored the need for clear communication and information regarding delirium to mitigate the negative emotional impact that delirium places on families.
This scoping review provides insights into the challenges facing families witnessing delirium in the acute care setting. A better understanding of family members' experiences can guide the development of a supported family-centred approach to delirium care.
No patient/public contribution.
In Australia, aligned to safety and quality standards, the health system implements standardised practices that include patient involvement in nursing bedside handover. Despite this mandate, it remains unclear whether patients are genuinely participating in nursing bedside handovers and whether their perspectives are being considered.
To explore patient perceptions of their involvement in nursing bedside handovers.
A cross-sectional survey study was conducted in two acute metropolitan hospitals in Western Australia from July 2021 to March 2022. The survey administered to patients, comprised three sections: demographic information; involvement in bedside handover; and perceptions of bedside handovers; utilising close-ended and Likert scale questions. Open-ended questions further explored participation in bedside handovers. Descriptive statistics and comparative analyses were performed and responses to open-ended questions underwent summative deductive content analysis.
Of the 390 participants, over half reported five or more bedside handovers (n = 197, 50.7%). Most perceived the importance of (n = 334, 79.0%), and expressed their satisfaction with (n = 327, 89.6%), involvement in bedside handover. Perceptions of handover were mostly positive. There were a few significant differences throughout based on type of hospital, gender and age-group. Open ended responses shared perceptions on the perceived benefits, challenges and barriers and ways to enhance involvement in bedside handover. Patients expressed several challenges, including lack of awareness of their right to participate, the approach of nurses and the timing of handovers as hindering their participation in bedside handovers.
Patients perceived the importance of, were mostly satisfied with, and had positive perceptions of bedside handover. However, several challenges hindered effective patient participation. Further research is needed into bedside handover as it is essential to enhance patient-centred quality care that aligns with national safety and quality healthcare standards.
Understanding the significance of patient involvement in bedside handovers motivates patients to actively share information about their care, leading to increased patient satisfaction and the promotion of patient-centred care. Addressing challenges through targeted strategies can enhance patient participation, communication, increased patient satisfaction and foster a more patient-centred approach to care.
The conduct of this study was supported by the consumer advisory group in the participating hospitals who also reviewed the survey questionnaires and conducted face validity of the survey.
To systematically summarise evidence related to the use of non-sterile gloves when preparing and administering intravenous antimicrobials.
Scoping review.
A rigorous scoping review was undertaken following Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) framework and the modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review guidelines (2018). Five databases and grey literature were included in the search. Literature published between 2009 and 2024 was included.
Five databases (Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science) and the grey literature were searched in February 2024.
Three studies were included; however, none directly addressed correct non-sterile glove use during intravenous antimicrobial preparation or administration in clinical practice.
We found no evidence to support the use of non-sterile gloves in intravenous antimicrobial preparation. There is an urgent need for rigorous research to inform the development of clear guidelines on non-sterile glove use to underpin evidence-based decision-making in nursing and other health professional education, improve patient outcomes, reduce healthcare costs and promote environmental sustainability in healthcare.
Inappropriate use of non-sterile gloves for preparing and administering intravenous antimicrobials hinders correct hand hygiene practices and increases healthcare-associated infections, healthcare costs and waste.
A critical gap in the existing evidence was a key finding of this review, highlighting the urgency for evidence-based guidelines to improve patient safety outcomes, reduce healthcare costs and promote environmental sustainability in healthcare.
This scoping review adhered to the relevant EQUATOR guidelines and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) reporting checklist.
This study did not include patient or public involvement in its design, conduct or reporting.
The protocol was registered on Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/QY4J2).
Research priorities guide research activities, funding and resources within health services. To ensure that research efforts are meaningful and impactful, it is vital that organisational research agendas reflect the priorities of both healthcare consumers and staff, alongside broader national and international research frameworks. This paper outlines a research priority-setting project conducted across two hospitals in Western Australia, aimed at identifying shared research priorities through a collaborative and inclusive approach.
To identify the top ten nursing and allied health research priorities for two hospitals in Western Australia.
A modified James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership approach was used, involving health services users, nurses, allied health professionals, and community members in a co-design approach across three phases. In phase 1, four community conversations were conducted to elicit an initial set of research topics. This data-informed phase 2, a survey to collect diverse views from a wider participant pool. In phase 3, a pre-selected sample of potential research priorities was discussed in a consensus workshop to reach a group consensus of the top ten research priorities. Qualitative data was analysed using multi-step thematic analysis, and quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics.
A total of 67, 151 and 18 people participated across study phases 1, 2 and 3, respectively, comprising nurses, allied health professionals, healthcare users, carers, and interested community members. The top ten research priorities reflected three areas: healthcare systems re/design (streamlining care; access to healthcare; patient journey and quality of care), workforce needs (workforce well-being, retention and adequate staffing; workforce training), and specific health issues and needs (dementia and delirium; mental health; caring for carers; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health; palliative care and elderly people).
The research priorities identified in this study for two hospitals in Western Australia reflect the strong desire of nurses, allied health professionals, healthcare users and community members to improve structural issues in healthcare systems. This includes how healthcare systems are designed and integrated with each other, how workforce needs affect service delivery, and a greater focus on holistic service provision for specific health issues and needs.
Healthcare consumers were an integral part of this study. Healthcare consumers were involved in the design of the study, the conduct of the study, and the review of the data analysis.
FreshRSS 