Conectar
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).
To explore the latent categories and influencing factors of dyadic decision self-efficacy among stroke patients and their caregivers.
A cross-sectional survey involving 305 patient-caregiver pairs was conducted using standardised questionnaires. Latent profile analysis was used to identify dyadic self-efficacy categories and multinomial logistic regression was employed to analyse influencing factors.
The dyadic decision self-efficacy of stroke patients and their caregivers was classified into three categories: low common decision self-efficacy group (35.6%), patients' high decision self-efficacy and caregivers' moderate decision self-efficacy group (38.6%), and high common decision self-efficacy group (25.8%). Influencing factors included patients' education level, income and health literacy, as well as caregivers' education, caregiving duration and social support.
The levels of dyadic decision self-efficacy among stroke patients and their caregivers are heterogeneous. Clinicians can develop targeted interventions involving both patients and caregivers, based on the population's characteristics and influencing factors, to improve their dyadic decision self-efficacy.
This study was conducted and reported in accordance with the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines.
To estimate the effects of nurse-led self-care interventions on people with heart failure (HF).
Research evidence of the effects of nurse-led HF self-care interventions on patient outcomes is scant.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
Six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PsycINFO) were searched from the inception to December 2022 to identify eligible studies.
RCTs published in English that evaluated the impact of nurse-led HF self-care interventions on quality of life, anxiety, symptom burden, sleep quality, healthcare service utilisation and mortality were included. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed using RoB 2.0. We conducted data syntheses using the R software and graded the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. The systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA.
Twenty-five studies with 2746 subjects were included. Our findings demonstrated, that compared to the controls, nurse-led self-care interventions improved QOL (SMD: .83, 95% CI: .50–1.15, moderate evidence), anxiety (MD: 1.39, 95% CI: .49–2.29, high evidence) and symptom burden (SMD: .81, 95% CI: .24–1.38, low evidence) in people with HF. No significant effects were found in all-cause hospital readmission and all-cause emergency department visit. Research evidence on sleep quality, cardiac-related hospital readmission, cardiac-related emergency department visit and all-cause mortality remained unclear.
Our review suggests that nurse-led HF self-care interventions have favourable effects on the QOL, anxiety and symptom burden. Further, well-designed RCTs are warranted to address the gaps identified in this review.
The results indicated that nurse-led HF self-care interventions could improve QOL, anxiety and symptom burden in people with HF. Nurse-led self-care intervention could be integrated into current HF management practices.
FreshRSS 