Conectar
Healthy aging has become increasingly important owing to the rapidly growing population of older adults globally, and results from the complex interplay of multiple characteristics such as depression and quality of life. Several countries have included peer-led interventions in their health policies to promote healthy aging. Given the growing evidence for these interventions, determining their comparative effectiveness is vital and warranted.
The aim of this study was to examine the relative effectiveness of peer-led interventions on the depression and quality of life of community-dwelling older adults.
A systematic review and network meta-analyses were performed. The meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models. Additionally, subgroup, meta-regression, and frequentist network meta-analyses were conducted. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42023492659).
Twelve studies with depression outcomes and 11 studies with quality-of-life outcomes were included. The effect sizes for depression and quality of life were moderate and small, respectively. For depression, face-to-face interactions and intervention duration were moderating factors. For quality of life, intervention provider was a moderating factor. The combined peer–nurse intervention was shown to have a large effect on quality of life, whereas interventions provided by professionals other than nurses or provided only by peers had a small effect. A ranking analysis found that the most effective intervention for increasing quality of life was the simultaneous involvement of both healthcare professionals and peers. The provision of education and exercise interventions showed a higher ranking than goal setting in the leading group.
The peer-led interventions were sufficient for depression. The effectiveness for improving quality of life may increase when involving both peers and healthcare professionals, particularly nurses. Nursing and health policymakers could establish distinct strategies depending on whether the goal of peer-led interventions is to improve quality of life or alleviate depression for older adults.
Cancer is a global public health concern that causes psychosocial and spiritual challenges in those who suffer from it and their family caregivers. Meaning-centered interventions have a positive impact on improving anxiety and depression in patients with advanced cancer. However, the impact of meaning-centered interventions on existential distress of patients with cancer and family caregivers' mental health is still unclear.
To examine the efficacy of meaning-centered interventions in alleviating existential distress, enhancing quality of life, and fostering a sense of meaning among cancer survivors and their family caregivers.
This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis 2020 statement. A comprehensive search was conducted from inception until September 2023 across nine databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, WANFANG, and CNKI. Heterogeneity testing and meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manger 5.3. We calculated standard mean deviations and 95% confidence intervals and presented forest plots for assessing intervention effects. Two reviewers independently evaluated the risk of bias of all included articles. STATA 17.0 was used for publication bias analysis.
The review included 25 studies with 2399 participants, and 22 were included in the meta-analysis. Meaning-centered interventions enhanced quality of life, alleviated existential distress, and reduced depressive symptoms and cancer-related fatigue. They did not affect spiritual well-being. The subgroup analysis showed that the individual form and long-term intervention (≥3 months) enhanced the quality of life in cancer survivors. Meaning-centered interventions reduce depression in advanced cancer survivors more than in mixed-stage cancer survivors. Meaning-centered interventions significantly enhanced benefit finding for family caregivers.
Meaning-centered interventions may improve mental health for patients with cancer and their family caregivers. Future research must include diverse cultural perspectives to understand the impact of meaning-centered interventions on various groups.
Chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment, care, and follow-up can negatively affect the health and well-being of caregivers. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) are increasingly used as a mental health intervention to control the psychological problems experienced by caregivers and improve their quality of life.
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide evidence for a holistic evaluation and synthesis of the effects of MBIs applied to caregivers of adults with chronic disease on the burden, quality of life, and psychological distress.
Studies evaluating the effects of mindfulness-based interventions on caregivers of adults with chronic diseases and published through September 2023 were searched using PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and EBSCO. Methodological quality was assessed with the modified JADAD scale, and bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Randomized controlled studies were included. The standardized mean difference with a 95% confidence interval was calculated. Heterogeneity was analyzed using the I 2 test and Q statistic. Publication bias was assessed with the Egger regression test.
This meta-analysis included 12 studies. Pooled evidence found that MBIs resulted in significant improvements in stress, anxiety, depression, and caregiver burden in caregivers of adults with chronic illness but had no significant effects on quality of life, resilience, and mindfulness. The Egger's test showed no evidence of publication bias.
MBIs can be considered as a helpful method to increase psychological well-being and reduce caregiver burden in caregivers of adults with chronic diseases. These findings may direct clinicians to conduct mindfulness-based interventions for caregivers of adults with chronic diseases.
An estimated 20% of emergency department (ED) patients require respiratory support (RS). Evidence suggests that nasal high flow (NHF) reduces RS need.
This review compared NHF to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in adult ED patients.
The systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) methods reflect the Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Six databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NHF to COT or NIV use in the ED. Three summary estimates were reported: (1) need to escalate care, (2) mortality, and (3) adverse events (AEs).
This SR and MA included 18 RCTs (n = 1874 participants). Two of the five MA conclusions were statistically significant. Compared with COT, NHF reduced the risk of escalation by 45% (RR 0.55; 95% CI [0.33, 0.92], p = .02, NNT = 32); however, no statistically significant differences in risk of mortality (RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.68, 1.54]; p = .91) and AE (RR 0.98; 95% CI [0.61, 1.59]; p = .94) outcomes were found. Compared with NIV, NHF increased the risk of escalation by 60% (RR 1.60; 95% CI [1.10, 2.33]; p = .01); mortality risk was not statistically significant (RR 1.23, 95% CI [0.78, 1.95]; p = .37).
Evidence-based decision-making regarding RS in the ED is challenging. ED clinicians have at times had to rely on non-ED evidence to support their practice. Compared with COT, NHF was seen to be superior and reduced the risk of escalation. Conversely, for this same outcome, NIV was superior to NHF. However, substantial clinical heterogeneity was seen in the NIV delivered. Research considering NHF versus NIV is needed. COVID-19 has exposed the research gaps and slowed the progress of ED research.
Having robust power sources and employing effective influence tactics are essential leadership skills for nurse managers in managing human resources, providing quality care, and managing workplace conflict among nurses.
The present study aimed to investigate how bedside nurses perceived their nurse managers' power bases, influence tactics, and conflict management styles. Furthermore, the study investigated the relationship among power bases, influence tactics, and conflict management styles.
A descriptive correlational study was conducted at the inpatient care unit of a Saudi hospital. A convenient sample of n = 230 nurses completed the Power Base scale, Influence Behavior Questionnaire (IBQ-R), and Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory-II (ROCI-II).
Nurses believed their managers were most likely to use referent, legitimate, and expert sources to exercise their power; appreciation and consultation tactics to influence others; and an integrative style to manage conflict. Significant positive correlations were found between the perceived overall power bases and each of the influence behaviors and conflict management styles (r = .466, r = .383, p < .05, respectively). The values of the regression coefficient of power bases significantly contribute to the prediction of 67.8% and 42.2% of the explained variance of influence behaviors and conflict management styles, respectively. In addition, influence behaviors can play a mediating role in this prediction.
Nurse managers should be able to demonstrate the benefit of controlling a wide range of power bases and know how to use influence behaviors and conflict management styles skillfully in each situation to achieve desired goals.
Weight management is an important part of disease management in patients with heart failure. However, the effectiveness of reported weight management interventions is inconclusive.
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effects of weight management on functional status, heart failure-related hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure.
PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched on April 3, 2022. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021283817). Eligible studies assessed functional status, heart failure-related hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure. Two researchers independently screened the articles, extracted data, and evaluated the risk bias of each study. Dichotomous variables were presented as OR with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The data were analyzed using a fixed effect or random effect model, and heterogeneity was determined using I 2 statistics. All statistical analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.3.
Among 4279 studies screened, seven randomized controlled trials were included in this study. The results showed that weight management significantly improved functional status (OR = 0.15, 95% CI [0.07, 0.35], I 2 = 52%) and reduced the risk of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.54, 95% CI [0.34, 0.85], I 2 = 0%), but had no significant effect on heart failure-related hospitalizations (OR = 0.72, 95% CI [0.20, 2.66]).
Weight management has effects on improved functional status and reduced all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure. It is necessary to strengthen the weight management interventions of patients with heart failure to improve patients' functional status and reduce all-cause mortality.
FreshRSS 