Conectar
This study aimed to gain a better understanding of nursing/midwifery students' perspectives on a pedagogy of caring and online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, it aimed to determine if the COVID-19 pandemic impacted students' perceptions and experience of online learning and students' desire to enter the nursing/midwifery workforce.
Mixed methods.
A multi-centre cross-sectional survey of Australian nursing and midwifery students was undertaken to explore students’ experience of learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.
There are several key findings from this study that may be relevant for the future delivery of undergraduate health education, students transitioning to practice and healthcare workforce retention. The study found that although students were somewhat satisfied with online learning during COVID-19, students reported significant issues with knowledge/skill acquisition and barriers to the learning process. The students reported feeling less prepared for practice and identified how clinical staff were unable to provide additional guidance and support due to increased workloads and stress. The textual responses of participants highlighted that connection/disconnection, empathy and engagement/disengagement had an impact on learning during COVID-19.
Connection, engagement and isolation were key factors that impacted nursing students’ online learning experiences. In addition, graduates entering the workforce felt less prepared for entry into practice due to changes in education delivery during COVID-19 that they perceived impacted their level of clinical skills, confidence and ability to practice as new graduate nurses/midwives.
Not applicable.
Attention must be given to the transition of new graduate nurses and midwives whose education was impacted by pandemic restrictions, to support their professional career development and to ensure retention of future healthcare workforce. Connection, engagement and isolation were key factors that impacted nursing students' online learning experiences. Educators should consider how connection and engagement can be actively embedded in the online learning environment.
Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) can affect individuals’ resilience to stressors and their vulnerability to mental, physical and social harms. This study explored associations between ACEs, financial coping during the cost-of-living crisis and perceived impacts on health and well-being.
National cross-sectional face-to-face survey. Recruitment used a random quota sample of households stratified by health region and deprivation quintile.
Households in Wales, UK.
1880 Welsh residents aged ≥18 years.
Outcome variables were perceived inability to cope financially during the cost-of-living crisis; rising costs of living causing substantial distress and anxiety; and self-reported negative impact of rising costs of living on mental health, physical health, family relationships, local levels of antisocial behaviour and violence, and community support. Nine ACEs were measured retrospectively. Socioeconomic and demographic variables included low household income, economic inactivity, residential deprivation and activity limitation.
The prevalence of all outcomes increased strongly with ACE count. Perceived inability to cope financially during the cost-of-living crisis increased from 14.0% with 0 ACEs to 51.5% with 4+ ACEs. Relationships with ACEs remained after controlling for socioeconomic and demographic factors. Those with 4+ ACEs (vs 0 ACEs) were over three times more likely to perceive they would be unable to cope financially and, correspondingly, almost three times more likely to report substantial distress and anxiety and over three times more likely to report negative impacts on mental health, physical health and family relationships.
Socioeconomically deprived populations are recognised to be disproportionately impacted by rising costs of living. Our study identifies a history of ACEs as an additional vulnerability that can affect all socioeconomic groups. Definitions of vulnerability during crises and communications with services on who is most likely to be impacted should consider childhood adversity and history of trauma.
Regular clinical reviews of people with COPD provide an opportunity to optimise management and are recommended in national and international guidelines. However, there are limited data about the relationship between having an annual review and other aspects of care quality, which might influence decision-making by healthcare professionals and commissioners.
Using data from 74 827 people with COPD completing the Asthma+Lung UK COPD Patient Passport, between 2014 and 2022, we conducted adjusted logistic regression (adjusting for year) and compared receipt of key items of care between those reporting that they had had an annual review (65.3%) and those who did not (34.7%). To further capture patient experience, we also analysed 4228 free-text responses to the 2021 Asthma+Lung UK annual COPD survey to the question ‘What is the one thing that could improve your COPD care?’
We found that the absence of an annual review was associated with significantly worse COPD care across all domains studied; in particular, inhaler training (yes: 80.8% vs no: 38.4%, adjusted OR (AOR): 8.18, 95% CI (7.89 to 8.47), having a written care plan (89.6% vs 56.9%, AOR 6.68 (95% CI 6.35 to 7.05) and medication knowledge (72.6% vs 33.6%, AOR 5.73 (95% CI 5.51 to 5.96). Thematic analysis of the 2021 COPD survey responses identified three areas to improve care: (1) access and support from healthcare services, (2) improved treatment effectiveness and (3) interaction between COPD and the social environment.
Failure to deliver annual COPD reviews is associated with worse patient-reported experience of care quality. In parallel, people with COPD express a desire for greater support and access to healthcare services.
To codesign a cancer personalised activity and lifestyle tool (CAN-PAL) based on an existing tool. To help cancer care workers support people affected by cancer to plan and integrate physical activity into lifestyles.
Mixed-methods codesign study.
Phase 1: Focus groups with people affected by cancer (n = 10) or interviews (n = 2) to discuss suitable physical activities and adaptation of the existing tool. Data were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Themes informed the design of the prototype CAN-PAL and user guide. Phase 2: Healthcare professionals considered the potential use of the CAN-PAL prototype and completed an online survey including the system usability scale and free text responses.
Phase 1: Identified suitable physical activities and four themes were identified including: Capability, benefits, barriers and resources which informed the prototype CAN-PAL and user guide. Phase 2: The user survey was completed by 12 healthcare professionals. Median (range) system usability scale was 80 (50–95) (best score 100), scores >68 indicate good or better usability. Themes from the free text comments included strengths, amendments, considerations and limitations. Results were used to finalise CAN-PAL and the user guide.
The codesigned CAN-PAL tool had good usability. Further work is needed to evaluate the impact of CAN-PAL on activity levels and behaviour in people affected by cancer.
People affected by cancer need support to undertake physical activity. The purpose of CAN-PAL is to assist cancer care workers to support people affected by cancer to plan and integrate physical activity into lifestyles.
Public partners considered the findings from Phase 1 and 2 and informed the design of the prototype, final CAN-PAL and user guide and coauthored the paper.
The study adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines; the study was reported according to the COREQ checklist.
Care home residents have experienced significant morbidity, mortality and disruption following outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of care home staff was introduced to reduce transmission of infection, but it is unclear whether this remains beneficial. This trial aims to investigate whether use of regular asymptomatic staff testing, alongside funding to reimburse sick pay for those who test positive and meet costs of employing agency staff, is a feasible and effective strategy to reduce COVID-19 impact in care homes.
The VIVALDI-Clinical Trial is a multicentre, open-label, cluster randomised controlled, phase III/IV superiority trial in up to 280 residential and/or nursing homes in England providing care to adults aged >65 years. All regular and agency staff will be enrolled, excepting those who opt out. Homes will be randomised to the intervention arm (twice weekly asymptomatic staff testing for SARS-CoV-2) or the control arm (current national testing guidance). Staff who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 will self-isolate and receive sick pay. Care providers will be reimbursed for costs associated with employing temporary staff to backfill for absence arising directly from the trial.
The trial will be delivered by a multidisciplinary research team through a series of five work packages.
The primary outcome is the incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admissions in residents. Secondary outcomes include the number and duration of outbreaks and home closures. Health economic and modelling analyses will investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost consequences of the testing intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews will be conducted to understand intervention roll out and identify areas for optimisation to inform future intervention scale-up, should the testing approach prove effective and cost-effective. Stakeholder engagement will be undertaken to enable the sector to plan for results and their implications and to coproduce recommendations on the use of testing for policy-makers.
The study has been approved by the London—Bromley Research Ethics Committee (reference number 22/LO/0846) and the Health Research Authority (22/CAG/0165). The results of the trial will be disseminated regardless of the direction of effect. The publication of the results will comply with a trial-specific publication policy and will include submission to open access journals. A lay summary of the results will also be produced to disseminate the results to participants.
FreshRSS 