Conectar
Radical chemoradiotherapy represents the gold standard for locally advanced cervical cancer. However, despite significant progress in improving local tumour control, distant relapse continues to impact overall survival. The development of predictive and prognostic biomarkers is consequently important to risk-stratify patients and identify populations at higher risk of poorer treatment response and survival outcomes. Exploratory study of using Magnetic resonance Prognostic Imaging markers for Radiotherapy In Cervix cancer (EMPIRIC) is a prospective exploratory cohort study, which aims to investigate the role of multiparametric functional MRI (fMRI) using diffusion-weighed imaging (DWI), dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) and blood oxygen level-dependent imaging (BOLD) MRI to assess treatment response and predict outcomes in patients undergoing radical chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer.
The study aims to recruit 40 patients across a single-centre over 2 years. Patients undergo multiparametric fMRI (DWI, DCE and BOLD-MRI) at three time points: before, during and at the completion of external beam radiotherapy. Tissue and liquid biopsies are collected at diagnosis and post-treatment to identify potential biomarker correlates against fMRI. The primary outcome is to evaluate sensitivity and specificity of quantitative parameters derived from fMRI as predictors of progression-free survival at 2 years following radical chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer. The secondary outcome is to investigate the roles of fMRI as predictors of overall survival at 2 years and tumour volume reduction across treatment. Statistical analyses using regression models and survival analyses are employed to evaluate the relationships between the derived parameters, treatment response and clinical outcomes.
The EMPIRIC study received ethical approval from the NHS Health Research Authority (HRA) on 14 February 2022 (protocol number RD2021-29). Confidentiality and data protection measures are strictly adhered to throughout the study. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences, aiming to contribute to the growing body of evidence on the use of multiparametric MRI in cervical cancer management.
To describe intensive care unit nurses' experiences of moral distress during the COVID-19 pandemic, and their recommendations for mitigative interventions.
Interpretive description.
Data were collected with a purposeful sample of 40 Canadian intensive care unit nurses between May and September 2021. Nurses completed a demographic questionnaire, the Measure of Moral Distress—Healthcare Professionals survey and in-depth interviews. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were categorized and synthesized using reflexive thematic analysis and rapid qualitative analysis.
Half of the nurses in this sample reported moderate levels of moral distress. In response to moral distress, nurses experienced immediate and long-term effects across multiple health domains. To cope, nurses discussed varied reactions, including action, avoidance and acquiescence. Nurses provided recommendations for interventions across multiple organizations to mitigate moral distress and negative health outcomes.
Nurses reported that moral distress drove negative health outcomes and attrition in response to moral events in practice. To change these conditions of moral distress, nurses require organizational investments in interventions and cultures that prioritize the inclusion of nursing perspectives and voices.
Nurses engage in a variety of responses to cope with moral distress. They possess valuable insights into the practice issues central to moral distress that have significant implications for all members of the healthcare teams, patients and systems. It is essential that nurses' voices be included in the development of future interventions central to the responses to moral distress.
This study adheres to COREQ guidelines.
Given the known structural, systemic and environmental factors that contribute to intensive care unit nurses' experiences of moral distress, and ultimately burnout and attrition, it was important to learn about their experiences of moral distress and their recommendations for organizational mitigative interventions. Documentation of these experiences and recommendations took on a greater urgency during the context of a global health emergency, the COVID-19 pandemic, where such contextual influences on moral distress were less understood.
Over half of the nurses reported a moderate level of moral distress. Nurses who were considering leaving nursing practice reported higher moral distress scores than those who were not considering leaving. In response to moral distress, nurses experienced a variety of outcomes across several health domains. To cope with moral distress, nurses engaged in patterns of action, avoidance and acquiescence. To change the conditions of moral distress, nurses desire organizational interventions, practices and culture changes situated in the amplification of their voices.
These findings will be of interest to: (1) researchers developing and evaluating interventions that address the complex phenomenon of moral distress, (2) leaders and administrators in hospitals, and relevant healthcare and nursing organizations, and (3) nurses interested in leveraging evidence-informed recommendations to advocate for interventions to address moral distress.
This paper advances the body of scientific work on nurses' experiences of moral distress, capturing this phenomenon within the unique context of a global health emergency. Nurses' levels of moral distress using Measure of Moral Distress—Healthcare Professional survey were reported, serving as a comparator for future studies seeking to measure and evaluate intensive care unit nurses' levels of moral distress. Nurses' recommendations for mitigative interventions for moral distress have been reported, which can help inform future interventional studies.
No patient or public contribution.
Early sepsis treatment in the emergency department (ED) is crucial to improve patient survival. Despite international promulgation, the uptake of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Hour-1 Bundle (lactate measurement, blood culture, broad-spectrum antibiotics, 30 mL/kg crystalloid for hypotension/lactate ≥4 mmol/L and vasopressors for hypotension during/after fluid resuscitation within 1 hour of sepsis recognition) is low across healthcare settings. Delays in sepsis recognition and a lack of high-quality evidence hinder its implementation. We propose a novel sepsis care model (National Early Warning Score, NEWS-1 care), in which the SSC Hour-1 Bundle is triggered objectively by a high NEWS-2 (≥5). This study aims to determine the feasibility of a full-scale type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial on the NEWS-1 care in multiple EDs.
We will conduct a pilot type 1 hybrid trial and prospectively recruit 200 patients from 4 public EDs in Hong Kong cluster randomised in a stepped wedge design over 10 months. All study sites will start with an initial period of standard care and switch in random order at 2-month intervals to the NEWS-1 care unidirectionally. The implementation evaluation will employ mixed methods guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework, which includes qualitative and quantitative data from focus group interviews, staff survey and clinical record reviews. We will analyse the 14 feasibility outcomes as progression criteria to a full-scale trial, including trial acceptability to patients and staff, patient and staff recruitment rates, accuracy of sepsis screening, protocol adherence, accessibility to follow-up data, safety and preliminary clinical impacts of the NEWS1 care, using descriptive statistics.
The institutional review boards of all study sites approved this study. This study will establish the feasibility of a full-scale hybrid trial. We will disseminate the findings through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and educational activities.
To create case definitions for confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses, COVID-19 vaccination status and three separate definitions of high risk of severe COVID-19, as well as to assess whether the implementation of these definitions in a cohort reflected the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 epidemiology in England.
Retrospective cohort study.
Electronic healthcare records from primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD) linked to secondary care data (Hospital Episode Statistics) data covering 24% of the population in England.
2 271 072 persons aged 1 year and older diagnosed with COVID-19 in CPRD Aurum between 1 August 2020 and 31 January 2022.
Age, sex and regional distribution of COVID-19 cases and COVID-19 vaccine doses received prior to diagnosis were assessed separately for the cohorts of cases identified in primary care and those hospitalised for COVID-19 (primary diagnosis code of ICD-10 U07.1 ‘COVID-19’). Smoking status, body mass index and Charlson Comorbidity Index were compared for the two cohorts, as well as for three separate definitions of high risk of severe disease used in the UK (National Health Service Highest Risk, PANORAMIC trial eligibility, UK Health Security Agency Clinical Risk prioritisation for vaccination).
Compared with national estimates, CPRD case estimates under-represented older adults in both the primary care (age 65–84: 6% in CPRD vs 9% nationally) and hospitalised (31% vs 40%) cohorts, and over-represented people living in regions with the highest median wealth areas of England (20% primary care and 20% hospital admitted cases in South East vs 15% nationally). The majority of non-hospitalised cases and all hospitalised cases had not completed primary series vaccination. In primary care, persons meeting high-risk definitions were older, more often smokers, overweight or obese, and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score.
CPRD primary care data are a robust real-world data source and can be used for some COVID-19 research questions, however, limitations of the data availability should be carefully considered. Included in this publication are supplemental files for a total of over 28 000 codes to define each of three definitions of high risk of severe disease.
To quantify direct costs and healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) associated with acute COVID-19 in adults in England.
Population-based retrospective cohort study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum primary care electronic medical records linked to Hospital Episode Statistics secondary care administrative data.
Patients registered to primary care practices in England.
1 706 368 adults with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or antigen test from August 2020 to January 2022 were included; 13 105 within the hospitalised cohort indexed between August 2020 and March 2021, and 1 693 263 within the primary care cohort indexed between August 2020 and January 2022. Patients with a COVID-19-related hospitalisation within 84 days of a positive test were included in the hospitalised cohort.
Primary and secondary care HCRU and associated costs ≤4 weeks following positive COVID-19 test, stratified by age group, risk of severe COVID-19 and immunocompromised status.
Among the hospitalised cohort, average length of stay, including critical care stays, was longer in older adults. Median healthcare cost per hospitalisation was higher in those aged 75–84 (£8942) and ≥85 years (£8835) than in those aged
COVID-19-related hospitalisations in older adults, particularly critical care stays, were the primary drivers of high COVID-19 resource use in England. These findings may inform health policy decisions and resource allocation in the prevention and management of COVID-19.
To compare the associations of COVID-19 preventive behaviours and depressive and anxiety symptoms with eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge among Korean adults.
A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in April 2020.
Seoul metropolitan area in South Korea.
1057 Korean adults were recruited.
Associations between eHealth literacy, COVID-19 knowledge, COVID-19 preventive behaviours and psychological distress were computed using Pearson’s correlation and logistic regression analyses. eHealth literacy, COVID-19 knowledge, COVID-19 preventive behaviours and psychological distress were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in Seoul Metropolitan area.
68.40% (n=723) perceived high eHealth literacy level (eHEALS ≥26), while 57.43% (n=605) had high levels of COVID-19 knowledge (score ≥25). No significant association between eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge was identified (r=0.05, p=0.09). eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge were significantly associated with COVID-19 preventive behaviours (aOR=1.99, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.62 L; aOR=1.81, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.34, respectively). High eHealth literacy was significantly associated with anxiety symptom (aOR=1.71, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.47) and depressive symptom (aOR=1.69, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.30). COVID-19 knowledge had negative and no associations with the symptoms (aOR=0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.86; aOR=0.79, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.03, respectively). High eHealth literacy with low COVID-19 knowledge was positively and significantly associated with COVID-19 preventive behaviours (aOR=2.30, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.43), and anxiety (aOR=1.81, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.01) and depressive symptoms (aOR=2.24, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.55). High eHealth literacy with high COVID-19 knowledge were significantly associated with more preventive behaviours (aOR=3.66, 95% CI 2.47 to 5.42) but no significant associations with anxiety and depressive symptoms.
We identified that eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge were not associated each other, and differently associated with individuals’ COVID-19 preventive behaviours and psychological well-being. Public health strategies should pay attention to enhancing both eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge levels in the public to maximise their COVID-19 preventive behaviours and mitigate their psychological distress during COVID-19 pandemic.
FreshRSS 