Conectar
To synthesise and map current evidence on nurse and midwife involvement in task-sharing service delivery, including both face-to-face and telehealth models, in primary care.
This scoping review was informed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Methodology for Scoping Reviews.
Five databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL and Cochrane Library) were searched from inception to 16 January 2024, and articles were screened for inclusion in Covidence by three authors. Findings were mapped according to the research questions and review outcomes such as characteristics of models, health and economic outcomes, and the feasibility and acceptability of nurse-led models.
One hundred peer-reviewed articles (as 99 studies) were deemed eligible for inclusion. Task-sharing models existed for a range of conditions, particularly diabetes and hypertension. Nurse-led models allowed nurses to work to the extent of their practice scope, were acceptable to patients and providers, and improved health outcomes. Models can be cost-effective, and increase system efficiencies with supportive training, clinical set-up and regulatory systems. Some limitations to telehealth models are described, including technological issues, time burden and concerns around accessibility for patients with lower technological literacy.
Nurse-led models can improve health, economic and service delivery outcomes in primary care and are acceptable to patients and providers. Appropriate training, funding and regulatory systems are essential for task-sharing models with nurses to be feasible and effective.
Nurse-led models are one strategy to improve health equity and access; however, there is a scarcity of literature on what these models look like and how they work in the primary care setting. Evidence suggests these models can also improve health outcomes, are perceived to be feasible and acceptable, and can be cost-effective. Increased utilisation of nurse-led models should be considered to address health system challenges and improve access to essential primary healthcare services globally.
This review is reported against the PRISMA-ScR criteria.
No patient or public contribution.
The study protocol is published in BJGP Open (Moulton et al., 2022).
To examine the effects of virtual reality-based cognitive interventions on cognitive function and activities of daily living among stroke patients, and to identify the optimal design for such intervention.
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINANL, JBI-EBP and Web of Science from inception to October 2023.
Methodological quality was assessed by Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses were assessed by Review Manager 5.4. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the influence of study design. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was adopted to assess the certainty of evidence.
Twenty-five randomized controlled trials (1178 participants) were included. Virtual reality-based cognitive interventions demonstrated moderate-to-large effects in improving global cognitive function (SMD = 0.43; 95% CI [0.01, 0.85]), executive function (SMD = 0.84; 95% CI [0.25, 1.43]) and memory (SMD = 0.65; 95% CI [0.15, 1.16]) compared to control treatments. No significant effects were found on language, visuospatial ability and activities of daily living. Subgroup analyses indicated one-on-one coaching, individualized design and dynamic difficulty adjustment, and interventions lasting ≥ 6 weeks had particularly enhanced effects, especially for executive function.
Virtual reality-based cognitive interventions improve global cognitive function, executive function and memory among stroke patients.
This review underscores the broad cognitive advantages offered by virtual technology, suggesting its potential integration into standard stroke rehabilitation protocols for enhanced cognitive recovery.
The study identifies key factors in virtual technology interventions that effectively improve cognitive function among stroke patients, offering healthcare providers a framework for leveraging such technology to optimize cognitive outcomes in stroke rehabilitation.
PRISMA 2020 statement.
CRD42022342668.
To determine the frequency, timing, and duration of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) and their impact on health and function.
Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection is an emerging major public health problem that is poorly understood and has no current treatment or cure. PASC is a new syndrome that has yet to be fully clinically characterised.
Descriptive cross-sectional survey (n = 5163) was conducted from online COVID-19 survivor support groups who reported symptoms for more than 21 days following SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Participants reported background demographics and the date and method of their covid diagnosis, as well as all symptoms experienced since onset of covid in terms of the symptom start date, duration, and Likert scales measuring three symptom-specific health impacts: pain and discomfort, work impairment, and social impairment. Descriptive statistics and measures of central tendencies were computed for participant demographics and symptom data.
Participants reported experiencing a mean of 21 symptoms (range 1–93); fatigue (79.0%), headache (55.3%), shortness of breath (55.3%) and difficulty concentrating (53.6%) were the most common. Symptoms often remitted and relapsed for extended periods of time (duration M = 112 days), longest lasting symptoms included the inability to exercise (M = 106.5 days), fatigue (M = 101.7 days) and difficulty concentrating, associated with memory impairment (M = 101.1 days). Participants reported extreme pressure at the base of the head, syncope, sharp or sudden chest pain, and “brain pressure” among the most distressing and impacting daily life.
Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection can be characterised by a wide range of symptoms, many of which cause moderate-to-severe distress and can hinder survivors' overall well-being.
This study advances our understanding of the symptoms of PASC and their health impacts.
The critical care nursing workforce is in crisis, with one-third of critical care nurses worldwide intending to leave their roles. This paper aimed to examine the problem from a wellbeing perspective, offering implications for research, and potential solutions for organisations.
Discursive/Position paper.
The discussion is based on the nursing and wellbeing literature. It is guided by the authors' collaborative expertise as both clinicians and researchers. Data were drawn from nursing and wellbeing peer-reviewed literature, such as reviews and empirical studies, national surveys and government and thinktank publications/reports.
Critical care nurses have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic with studies consistently showing critical care nurses to have the worst psychological outcomes on wellbeing measures, including depression, burnout and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). These findings are not only concerning for the mental wellbeing of critical care nurses, they also raise significant issues for healthcare systems/organisations: poor wellbeing, increased burnout and PTSD are directly linked with critical care nurses intending to leave the profession. Thus, the wellbeing of critical care nurses must urgently be supported. Resilience has been identified as a protective mechanism against the development of PTSD and burnout, thus offering evidence-based interventions that address resilience and turnover have much to offer in tackling the workforce crisis. However, turnover data must be collected by studies evaluating resilience interventions, to further support their evidence base. Organisations cannot solely rely on the efficacy of these interventions to address their workforce crisis but must concomitantly engage in organisational change.
We conclude that critical care nurses are in urgent need of preventative, evidence-based wellbeing interventions, and make suggestions for research and practice.
FreshRSS 