This study aims to describe current nurse prescribing practices in the absence of a legal framework, evaluate healthcare providers' preferred prescribing models, and their perceptions of the impact of nurse prescribing in Belgian hospitals.
Multicentre quantitative, cross-sectional survey.
Between December 2022 and April 2023, healthcare providers from seven Flemish hospitals completed an online survey after being presented with a short explanatory video on independent and supplementary nurse prescribing. The survey assessed demographics, current practices, expected impact and preferred prescribing models.
Of the 303 respondents, 86% were nurses, 10% were medical doctors and 4% were pharmacists.
Independent nurse prescribing or deprescribing of medications was reported by 75% in their current work context. Nurse prescribing was observed weekly or daily by 48%, primarily for initiating new medications. Overall, 44% preferred independent nurse prescribing over no prescribing.
Despite the absence of a legal framework, nurses in Belgian hospitals regularly prescribe medications. Most healthcare providers positively perceive the expected impact of nurse prescribing.
There is an urgent need for legal and institutional frameworks that acknowledge existing practices, define responsibilities and support safe and effective care. Structured policies could improve interprofessional collaboration, clarify clinical accountability and ensure consistent training for nurse prescribers.
This study addressed the widespread but informal practice of nurse prescribing in the absence of legal regulation in Belgium. It found that a majority of healthcare providers observed nurse prescribing in clinical practice and preferred formalised prescribing models. These insights can support health authorities, healthcare decision-makers and educators in designing regulations, implementation strategies and curricula aligned with clinical practice.
The authors adhered to the STROBE reporting checklist for cross-sectional studies.
This study did not include patient or public involvement in its design, conduct, analysis or reporting.
To identify and report results from studies of anxiety and depression, as measured by The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in patients ≥ 80 years admitted to hospital settings, and to inform nurses, researchers and educators in nursing about these findings.
Systematic review.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane, Epistemonikos, Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection of studies published until October 2023.
A search strategy was developed with a university librarian. Four independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts based on predefined inclusion criteria. Data were systematically extracted, descriptively analysed, and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists were used to assess studies.
Out of 7076 identified studies, three met the eligibility criteria. Data from 420 participants aged ≥ 80 years were analysed, revealing anxiety prevalence rates between 6% and 18% and mean scores below 4. Depression prevalence rates ranged from 7% to 17%, with a mean score below 4. Most patients with depression were not previously recognised as being depressed.
Few publications reported on anxiety and/or depression in hospitalised patients aged ≥ 80 years using HADS. A gap in the knowledge base has been identified.
Anxiety and depression are mental health conditions that can lead to adverse events and strongly affect aging. Increased understanding of the role that these conditions have on hospitalised patients ≥ 80 years is important for nurses when in contact with this patient group.
There is a need for more studies to generate evidence regarding anxiety and depression in an increasingly common and challenging hospital population by building upon evidence that is based on validated instruments such as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.
The PRISMA guideline was followed, and the review registered in PROSPERO (Registration number CRD 42022380943).
No patient or public contribution.
CRD 42022380943