To develop and psychometrically test a comprehensive Cancer Nurse Self-Assessment Tool (CaN-SAT).
Modified Delphi to assess content validity and cross-sectional survey to assess reliability and validity.
Phase 1: An expert group developed the tool structure and item content. Phase 2: Through a modified Delphi, cancer nursing experts rated the importance of each element of practice and assessed the relevance and clarity of each item. Content Validation Indexes (CVI) were calculated, and a CVI of ≥ 0.78 was required for items to be included. Phase 3: Cancer nurses participated in a survey to test internal consistency (using Cronbach's alpha coefficients) and known-group validity (through Mann–Whitney U tests). This study was reported using the Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) checklist.
The CaN-SAT underwent two rounds of Delphi with 24 then 15 cancer nursing experts. All elements of practice were rated as important. Only three items achieved a CVI < 0.78 after round one; however, based on open-ended comments, 26 items were revised and one new item added. After round two, all items received a CVI above 0.78. The final tool consisted of 93 items across 15 elements of practice. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were between 0.92 and 0.98 indicating good reliability. Mann–Whitney U tests demonstrated significant differences between clinical nurses and advanced practice nurses across 13 out of 15 elements of practice.
The CaN-SAT is a comprehensive, valid and reliable tool that can be used for cancer nurses to self-assess current skill levels, identify their learning needs and inform decisions about educational opportunities to optimise cancer care provision.
The research team included three patient advocates from Cancer Voices NSW, who were actively involved in all aspects of the study and are listed as authors.
To review current evidence on the implementation and impact of virtual nursing care in long-term aged care.
An integrative rapid literature review.
Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, Ageline and Scopus.
The review included studies involving virtual care interventions provided by nurses (or by a multidisciplinary team including nurses) to older people in residential aged care that reported health outcomes or stakeholder experiences. Consistent with PRISMA guidelines, databases were systematically searched in July and August 2024, focusing on literature published since 2014. Studies were screened in Covidence by three team members, with conflicts resolved by additional reviewers. Studies not involving nurses or not set in aged care were excluded.
The search identified 13 studies, which included quantitative, qualitative and mixed-method approaches, conducted in both Australian and international settings, as well as in rural and metropolitan locations. Nurses were often involved as part of an existing virtual care programme, typically located in a hospital setting. The training and credentials of nurses delivering VN varied in terms of specialisation and advanced practice. The model of care in general was ad hoc, though in some cases there were regular, scheduled VN consultations. The time requirements for onsite staff and nurses were not well articulated in any of the studies, and information on the funding models used was also lacking.
There is some evidence that VN interventions in aged care may improve communication, enhance person-centred care and reduce emergency department presentations and hospitalisations.
Rigorous, ongoing evaluation of VN interventions is required to ensure their appropriate application in residential aged care.
To develop and psychometrically test two newly developed Cancer Nurse Self-Assessment Tools for early and metastatic breast cancer (CaN-SAT-eBC and CAN-SAT-mBC).
Instrument development and psychometric testing of content validity, reliability and construct validity.
A three-phase procedure was conducted. Phase 1: An expert working group was formed to design and develop each tool using Benner's Model of Clinical Competence. Phase 2: The Content Validation Index (CVI) was used to assess the relevance and clarity of each item on the tools with breast cancer nurse experts and nursing educators. A CVI ≥ 0.78 was required for an item to be included in each tool. Phase 3: The tools were tested for internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha and construct validity using principal component analysis (PCA). The Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies were followed in reporting this study.
Each tool underwent two rounds of content validation. Ten experts were involved in the content validation for the CaN-SAT-eBC and 12 experts involved for CaN-SAT-mBC. The final versions comprised 18 (CAN-SAT-eBC) and 22 elements (CaN-SAT-mBC). All items obtained a satisfactory CVI of 0.83–1.0. Data from 159 and 126 nurses were analysed to evaluate reliability for CaN-SAT-eBC and CaN-SAT-mBC, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients for all elements were between 0.83 and 0.98. The PCA supported that each element was unidimensional and composed of internally correlated items, with the exception of the ‘Diagnostics’ element of practice which has a two-component structure measuring basic and advanced diagnostic tasks.
The two CaN-SATs are comprehensive, valid and reliable. They can be used for self-assessment by nurses in relation to breast cancer care and for identifying learning needs for long-term professional development. The self-assessment tools can also be used to develop education initiatives for specialised breast cancer nurses.
No patient or public contribution.
To understand, from a nursing perspective, factors affecting the use of prophylactic dressings to prevent pressure injuries in acute hospitalised adults.
Pressure injury causes harm to patients and incurs significant costs to health services. Significant emphasis is placed on their prevention. Relatively recently, prophylactic dressings have been promoted to reduce pressure injury development. However, in the acute care setting, information about the clinical use of these dressing is lacking.
Qualitative, descriptive.
Nineteen medical and surgical nurses participated. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was performed using an inductive approach using NVivo software.
Three themes were identified, reflecting factors that influenced and perpetuated indiscriminate use of prophylactic dressings: False sense of security; Convenience and task prioritisation; and Navigating challenges in evidence-based pressure injury prevention.
The findings indicate inconsistent prevention practices, with prophylactic dressings often applied without justification or referral to research-based evidence to guide clinical decision-making. There was a prevailing attitude of ‘job done’ when a prophylactic dressing was applied.
This study has identified several factors that perpetuate the inappropriate use of prophylactic dressings for pressure injury prevention that may be amenable to organisational change. The findings indicate that nurses often rely on these dressings as a shortcut due to time constraints, which led to missed skin assessments and low-value care. The research can be used to inform the development of clear guidelines on dressings within hospital settings which encourage assessment-based selection for their use, and process-based guidance for their application, skin surveillance, dressing inspection and removal.
The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) reporting guideline was followed.
Neither patients nor the public were directly involved in this study.
To gather and understand the experience of hospital mealtimes from the perspectives of those receiving and delivering mealtime care (older inpatients, caregivers and staff) using photovoice methods to identify touchpoints and themes to inform the co-design of new mealtime interventions.
This study was undertaken on acute care wards within a single metropolitan hospital in Brisbane, Australia in 2019. Photovoice methods involved a researcher accompanying 21 participants (10 older patients, 5 caregivers, 4 nurses and 2 food service officers) during a mealtime and documenting meaningful elements using photographs and field notes. Photo-elicitation interviews were then undertaken with participants to gain insight into their experience. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis, involving a multidisciplinary research team including a consumer.
Themes were identified across the three touchpoints: (1) preparing for the meal (the juggle, the anticipation), (2) delivering/receiving the meal (the rush, the clutter and the wait) and (3) experiencing the meal (the ideal, pulled away and acceptance). Despite a shared understanding of the importance of meals and shared vision of ‘the ideal’ mealtime, generally this was a time of tension, missed cares and dissatisfaction for staff, patients and caregivers. There was stark contrast in some aspects of mealtime experience, with simultaneous experiences of ‘the rush’ (staff) and ‘the wait’ (patients and caregivers). There was an overwhelming sense of acceptance and lack of control over change from all.
This study identified themes during hospital mealtimes which have largely gone unaddressed in the design of mealtime interventions to date. This research may provide a framework to inform the future co-design of mealtime interventions involving patients, caregivers and multidisciplinary staff, centred around these key touchpoints.
Mealtimes are experienced differently by patients, caregivers, nurses and food service officers across three key touchpoints: preparing for, delivering/receiving and experiencing the meal. Improving mealtime experiences therefore necessitates a collaborative approach, with co-designed mealtime improvement programs that include specific interventions focusing each touchpoint. Our data suggest that improvements could focus on reducing clutter, clarifying mealtime roles and workflows and supporting caregiver involvement.
Mealtimes are the central mechanism to meet patients' nutritional needs in hospital; however, research consistently shows that many patients do not eat enough to meet their nutritional requirements and that they often do not receive the mealtime assistance they require. Interventions to improve hospital mealtimes have, at best, shown only modest improvements in nutritional intake and mealtime care practices. Gaining deeper insight into the mealtime experience from multiple perspectives may identify new opportunities for improvement.
Patients, caregivers and staff have shared ideals of comfort, autonomy and conviviality at mealtimes, but challenges of complex teamwork and re-prioritisation of mealtimes in the face of prevailing power hierarchies make it difficult to achieve this ideal. There are three discrete touchpoints (preparing for, delivering/receiving and experiencing the meal) that require different approaches to improvement. Our data suggests a need to focus improvement on reducing clutter, clarifying mealtime roles and workflows and supporting caregivers.
The research provides a framework for multidisciplinary teams to begin co-designing improvements to mealtime care to benefit patients, caregivers and staff, while also providing a method for researchers to understand other complex care situations in hospital.
This manuscript is written in adherence with the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research.
Patients and caregivers were involved in the conception and design of the study through their membership of the hospital mealtime reference group. A consumer researcher (GP) was involved in the team to advise on study conduct (i.e. recruitment methods and information), data analysis (i.e. coding transcripts), data interpretation (i.e. review and refinement of themes) and manuscript writing (i.e. review and approval of final manuscript).