Conectar
To identify, synthesise and map systematic reviews of the effectiveness of nursing interventions undertaken in a neonatal intensive care unit or special care nursery.
This scoping review was conducted according to the JBI scoping review framework.
Review included systematic reviews that evaluated any nurse-initiated interventions that were undertaken in an NICU or SCN setting. Studies that reported one or more positive outcomes related to the nursing interventions were only considered for this review. Each outcome for nursing interventions was rated a ‘certainty (quality) of evidence’ according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria.
Systematic reviews were sourced from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence Synthesis for reviews published until February 2023.
A total of 428 articles were identified; following screening, 81 reviews underwent full-text screening, and 34 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Multiple nursing interventions reporting positive outcomes were identified and were grouped into seven categories. Respiratory 7/34 (20%) and Nutrition 8/34 (23%) outcomes were the most reported categories. Developmental care was the next most reported category 5/34 (15%) followed by Thermoregulation, 5/34 (15%) Jaundice 4/34 (12%), Pain 4/34 (12%) and Infection 1/34 (3%).
This review has identified nursing interventions that have a direct positive impact on neonatal outcomes. However, further applied research is needed to transfer this empirical knowledge into clinical practice.
Implementing up-to-date evidence on effective nursing interventions has the potential to significantly improving neonatal outcomes.
No patient or public involvement in this scoping review.
by Richard Gebler, Martin Lehmann, Maik Löwe, Mirko Gruhl, Markus Wolfien, Miriam Goldammer, Franziska Bathelt, Jens Karschau, Andreas Hasselberg, Veronika Bierbaum, Toni Lange, Katja Polotzek, Hanns-Christoph Held, Michael Albrecht, Jochen Schmitt, Martin Sedlmayr
BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic revealed a need for better collaboration among research, care, and management in Germany as well as globally. Initially, there was a high demand for broad data collection across Germany, but as the pandemic evolved, localized data became increasingly necessary. Customized dashboards and tools were rapidly developed to provide timely and accurate information. In Saxony, the DISPENSE project was created to predict short-term hospital bed capacity demands, and while it was successful, continuous adjustments and the initial monolithic system architecture of the application made it difficult to customize and scale.
MethodsTo analyze the current state of the DISPENSE tool, we conducted an in-depth analysis of the data processing steps and identified data flows underlying users’ metrics and dashboards. We also conducted a workshop to understand the different views and constraints of specific user groups, and brought together and clustered the information according to content-related service areas to determine functionality-related service groups. Based on this analysis, we developed a concept for the system architecture, modularized the main services by assigning specialized applications and integrated them into the existing system, allowing for self-service reporting and evaluation of the expert groups’ needs.
ResultsWe analyzed the applications’ dataflow and identified specific user groups. The functionalities of the monolithic application were divided into specific service groups for data processing, data storage, predictions, content visualization, and user management. After composition and implementation, we evaluated the new system architecture against the initial requirements by enabling self-service reporting to the users.
DiscussionBy modularizing the monolithic application and creating a more flexible system, the challenges of rapidly changing requirements, growing need for information, and high administrative efforts were addressed.
ConclusionWe demonstrated an improved adaptation towards the needs of various user groups, increased efficiency, and reduced burden on administrators, while also enabling self-service functionalities and specialization of single applications on individual service groups.
by Daniel W. Flowers, Brian T. Swanson, Stephen M. Shaffer, Derek J. Clewley, Sean P. Riley
The primary objective of this review was to create a ‘trustworthy,’ living systematic review and meta-analysis for the application of manual therapy interventions in treating patients with shoulder dysfunction. Included studies were English-language randomized controlled trials published between 1/1/2010 and 8/3/2023, with searches performed in: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINHAL, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health, EBSCO Medline, and PEDro. The population of focus included adults 18 years and older with musculoskeletal impairments related to shoulder dysfunction. Our primary outcomes included pain and region-specific outcome measures. We excluded trials, including participants having shoulder dysfunction resulting from surgery, radicular pain, instability/dislocation, fracture, lymphedema, and radiation. Our screening methodology was based upon a previously published ‘trustworthy’ systematic review protocol. This included the application of our PICOTS criteria in addition to screening for prospective clinical trial registration and following of prospective intent, as well as assessment of PEDro scores, risk-of-bias ratings, GRADE scoring, and examination of confidence in estimated effects. Twenty-six randomized controlled trials met our PICOTS criteria; however, only 15 of these were registered. Only three were registered prospectively. Two of these did not have discussions and conclusions that aligned with their primary outcome. The remaining single study was found to have a high risk-of-bias, meaning the remainder of the protocol could not be employed and that no randomized controlled trials could undergo further assessment or meta-analysis. The results of this systematic review indicate there are no ‘trustworthy’ randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of manual therapy interventions for the treatment of patients with shoulder dysfunction, as defined by the prospectively established methodology. Therefore, these findings signal that creating a ‘trustworthy,’ living systematic review on this clinically relevant topic is not yet possible due to a lack of ‘trustworthy’ randomized controlled trials.by Ashley G. Holtz, Troy L. Lowe, Yusuke Aoki, Yutaro Kubota, Robert M. Hoffman, Steven G. Clarke
The methionine addiction of cancer cells is known as the Hoffman effect. While non-cancer cells in culture can utilize homocysteine in place of methionine for cellular growth, most cancer cells require exogenous methionine for proliferation. It has been suggested that a biochemical basis of this effect is the increased utilization of methionine for S-adenosylmethionine, the major methyl donor for a variety of cellular methyltransferases. Recent studies have pointed to the role of S-adenosylmethionine-dependent protein arginine methyltransferases (PRMTs) in cell proliferation and cancer. To further understand the biochemical basis of the methionine addiction of cancer cells, we compared protein arginine methylation in two previously described isogenic cell lines, a methionine-addicted 143B human osteosarcoma cell line and its less methionine-dependent revertant. Previous work showed that the revertant cells were significantly less malignant than the parental cells. In the present study, we utilized antibodies to detect the asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) and symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA) products of PRMTs in polypeptides from cellular extracts and purified histone preparations of these cell lines fractionated by SDS-PAGE. Importantly, we observed little to no differences in the banding patterns of ADMA- and SDMA-containing species between the osteosarcoma parental and revertant cell lines. Furthermore, enzymatic activity assays using S-adenosyl-ʟ-[methyl-3H] methionine, recombinantly purified PRMT enzymes, cell lysates, and specific PRMT inhibitors revealed no major differences in radiolabeled polypeptides on SDS-PAGE gels. Taken together, these results suggest that changes in protein arginine methylation may not be major contributors to the Hoffman effect and that other consequences of methionine addiction may be more important in the metastasis and malignancy of osteosarcoma and potentially other cancers.Head and neck cancer is the eighth most common cancer in the UK. Current standard of care treatment for patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell head and neck carcinoma (HNSCC) is platinum-based chemotherapy combined with the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody, cetuximab. However, most patients will have poor median overall survival (OS) of 6–9 months despite treatment. HNSCC tumours exhibit an immune landscape poised to respond to immunotherapeutic approaches, with most tumours expressing the immunosuppressive receptor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). We undertook the current study to determine the safety and efficacy of avelumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the interaction between PD-L1 and its receptor on cytotoxic T-cells, in combination with cetuximab.
This is a multi-centre, single-arm dose de-escalation phase II safety and efficacy study of avelumab combined with cetuximab; the study was to progress to a randomised phase II trial, however, the study will now complete after the safety run-in component. Up to 16 participants with histologically/cytologically recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma (including HNSCC) who have not received cetuximab previously will be recruited. All patients will receive 10 mg/kg avelumab and cetuximab (500, 400 or 300 mg/m2 depending on the cohort open at time of registration) on days 1 and 15 of 4-week cycles for up to 1 year, (avelumab not given cycle 1 day 1). A modified continual reassessment method will be used to determine dose de-escalation. The primary objective is to establish the safety of the combination and to determine the optimum dose of cetuximab. Secondary objectives include assessing evidence of antitumour activity by evaluating response rates and disease control rates at 6 and 12 months as well as progression-free and OS.
Approval granted by City and East REC (18/LO/0021). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at conferences.
Women from social disadvantage are at greater risk of poor birth outcomes. The midwife-led continuity of care (MCC) model, which offers flexible and relational care from a small team of midwives, has demonstrated improved birth outcomes. In the general population, the impact of MCC on socially disadvantaged women and on birth outcomes is still unclear. This protocol describes a pragmatic evaluation of the MCC model in a socially disadvantaged population.
An open-labelled individual prospective randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot, process evaluation and economic analysis, from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2024.
Women will be randomly allocated to MCC or standard care as part of usual midwifery practice. Participants and midwives will not be blinded, but researchers will be. An internal pilot will test the feasibility of this process.
Participants are those randomised into MCC or standard care, who consent to participate in one of two Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohort studies. Outcomes are taken from routinely linked health data, supplemented by additional data capture. The sample size is fixed by the capacity of MCC teams, commissioning duration and numbers recruited into the cohort. The estimated maximum fixed sample size is 1,410 pregnancies (minimum 734).
Intention to treat (ITT) analysis will be undertaken to assess the impact of MCC on two independent primary outcomes. An economic evaluation will explore the impact on health resource use and a process evaluation will explore fidelity to the MCC model, and barriers/facilitators to implementation from midwives’ and women’s perspectives.
Ethical approval has been obtained for the randomisation in midwifery practice, use of the cohort data for evaluation and for the process evaluation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and translated into policy briefings.
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 