Conectar
To explore the views and preferences for advance care planning from the perspectives of residents, family members and healthcare professionals in long-term care facilities.
A qualitative descriptive design.
We conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 residents of long-term care facilities, 10 family members and 14 healthcare professionals. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The social ecological model was used to develop implementation recommendations.
We constructed a conceptual model of barriers and facilitators to advance care planning in long-term care facilities, drawing upon four dominant themes from the qualitative analysis: (1) The absence of discourse on end-of-life care: a lack of cultural climate to talk about death, the unspoken agreement to avoid conversations about death, and poor awareness of palliative care may hinder advance care planning initiation; (2) Relational decision-making process is a dual factor affecting advance care planning engagement; (3) Low trust and ‘unsafe’ cultures: a lack of honest information sharing, risks of violating social expectations and damaging social relationships, and risks of legal consequences may hinder willingness to engage in advance care planning; (4) Meeting and respecting residents' psychosocial needs: these can be addressed by readiness assessment, initiating advance care planning in an informal and equal manner and involving social workers.
Our findings show that residents' voices were not being heard. It is necessary to identify residents' spontaneous conversation triggers, articulate the value of advance care planning in light of the family's values and preferences, and respect residents' psychosocial needs to promote advance care planning in long-term care facilities. Advance care planning may alleviate the decision-making burden of offspring in nuclear families.
The evidence-based recommendations in this study will inform the implementation of context-specific advance care planning in Asia-Pacific regions.
Patients and caregivers contributed to the interview pilot and data collection.
To identify how family caregivers adapt to the caregiving role following a relative's COVID-19-related intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalisation.
Family caregiving is often associated with poor health amongst caregivers which may limit their capacity to effectively support patients. Though severe COVID-19 infection has necessitated increasing numbers of persons who require caregiver support, little is known about these caregivers, the persons they are caring for, or the strategies used to effectively adjust to the caregiving role.
A qualitative descriptive study design was adopted, and findings are reported using COREQ.
A secondary analysis of transcripts from semi-structured interviews conducted with recently discharged ICU patients who had COVID-19 (n = 16) and their family caregivers (n = 16) was completed using thematic analysis. MAXQDA 2020 and Miro were used to organise data and complete coding. Analysis involved a structured process of open and closed coding to identify and confirm themes that elucidated adaptation to family caregiving.
Six themes highlight how family caregivers adapt to the caregiving role following an ICU COVID-19-related hospitalisation including (1) engaging the support of family and friends, (2) increased responsibilities to accommodate caregiving, (3) managing emotions, (4) managing infection control, (5) addressing patient independence and (6) engaging support services. These themes were found to be congruent with the Roy adaptation model.
Family caregiving is a stressful transition following a patient's acute hospitalisation. Effective adaptation requires flexibility and sufficient support, beginning with the care team who can adequately prepare the family for the anticipated challenges of recovery.
Clinical teams may improve post-hospitalisation care outcomes of patients by preparing families to effectively adjust to the caregiver role—particularly in identifying sufficient support resources.
Participation of patients/caregivers in this study was limited to the data provided through participant interviews.
To explore the career decisions and aspirations of early-career registered nurses in New Brunswick, Canada.
A qualitative study using an interpretive description approach was conducted.
Semi-structured one-on-one interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of nurses (n = 22) currently working in New Brunswick, Canada, with up to 5 years of experience from February to April 2022.
Participants described diverse career paths and aspirations. Personal factors affecting these included the desire for meaningful work, career satisfaction, work-life balance, spending time with family, working in a preferred location, and finances. Professionally, working conditions were the dominant factor influencing early-career nurses' career decisions and aspirations. Participants described how short staffing, safety, support, and scheduling influenced their day-to-day work, mental and physical health, job and career satisfaction, and intent to leave.
The findings highlighted the abundant and diverse career opportunities available to nurses early in their careers. Early-career nurses are interested in finding nursing positions with a high degree of person-job fit and value opportunities for ongoing professional education and growth.
This study in New Brunswick, Canada, explores early-career nurses' career decisions and aspirations during nursing shortages and the pandemic, emphasizing the importance of person-job fit. Recommendations include improving working conditions and career pathways to enhance the sustainability of the nursing profession.
Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR).
No patient or public contribution.
To evaluate the impact of usual care plus a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care only for patients in hospital with COVID-19 on patient experience, care quality, functional ability, treatment outcomes, nurses' moral distress, patient health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness.
Parallel two-arm, cluster-level randomized controlled trial.
Between 18th January and 20th December 2021, we recruited (i) adults aged 18 years and over with COVID-19, excluding those invasively ventilated, admitted for at least three days or nights in UK Hospital Trusts; (ii) nurses caring for them. We randomly assigned hospitals to use a fundamental nursing care guideline and usual care or usual care only. Our patient-reported co-primary outcomes were the Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire and four scales from the Quality from the Patient Perspective Questionnaire. We undertook intention-to-treat analyses.
We randomized 15 clusters and recruited 581 patient and 418 nurse participants. Primary outcome data were available for 570–572 (98.1%–98.5%) patient participants in 14 clusters. We found no evidence of between-group differences on any patient, nurse or economic outcomes. We found between-group differences over time, in favour of the intervention, for three of our five co-primary outcomes, and a significant interaction on one primary patient outcome for ethnicity (white British vs. other) and allocated group in favour of the intervention for the ‘other’ ethnicity subgroup.
We did not detect an overall difference in patient experience for a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care. We have indications the guideline may have aided sustaining good practice over time and had a more positive impact on non-white British patients' experience of care.
We cannot recommend the wholescale implementation of our guideline into routine nursing practice. Further intervention development, feasibility, pilot and evaluation studies are required.
Fundamental nursing care drives patient experience but is severely impacted in pandemics. Our guideline was not superior to usual care, albeit it may sustain good practice and have a positive impact on non-white British patients' experience of care.
CONSORT and CONSERVE.
Patients with experience of hospitalization with COVID-19 were involved in guideline development and writing, trial management and interpretation of findings.
To explore and summarise the literature on the concept of ‘clinical deterioration’ as a nurse-sensitive indicator of quality of care in the out-of-hospital context.
The scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Review and the JBI best practice guidelines for scoping reviews.
Studies focusing on clinical deterioration, errors of omission, nurse sensitive indicators and the quality of nursing and midwifery care for all categories of registered, enrolled, or licensed practice nurses and midwives in the out-of-hospital context were included regardless of methodology. Text and opinion papers were also considered. Study protocols were excluded.
Data bases were searched from inception to June 2022 and included CINAHL, PsychINFO, MEDLINE, The Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, EmCare, Maternity and Infant Care Database, Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet, Informit Health and Society Database, JSTOR, Nursing and Allied Health Database, RURAL, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Institute.
Thirty-four studies were included. Workloads, education and training opportunities, access to technology, home visits, clinical assessments and use of screening tools or guidelines impacted the ability to recognise, relay information and respond to clinical deterioration in the out-of-hospital setting.
Little is known about the work of nurses or midwives in out-of-hospital settings and their recognition, reaction to and relay of information about patient deterioration. The complex and subtle nature of non-acute deterioration creates challenges in defining and subsequently evaluating the role and impact of nurses in these settings.
Further research is needed to clarify outcome measures and nurse contribution to the care of the deteriorating patient in the out-of-hospital setting to reduce the rate of avoidable hospitalisation and articulate the contribution of nurses and midwives to patient care.
Factors that impact a nurse's ability to recognise, relay information and respond to clinical deterioration in the out-of-hospital setting are not examined to date.
A range of factors were identified that impacted a nurse's ability to recognise, relay information and respond to clinical deterioration in the out-of-hospital setting including workloads, education and training opportunities, access to technology, home visits, clinical assessments, use of screening tools or guidelines, and avoidable hospitalisation.
Where and on whom will the research have an impact?
Nurses and nursing management will benefit from understanding the factors that act as barriers and facilitators for effective recognition of, and responding to, a deteriorating patient in the out-of-hospital setting. This in turn will impact patient survival and satisfaction.
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Review guidelines guided this review. The PRISMA-Scr Checklist (Tricco et al., 2018) is included as (supplementary file 1).Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.”
Not required as the Scoping Review used publicly available information.
FreshRSS 