Conectar
Concerns about falling (CaF) are common in older people and have been associated with avoidance of activities of daily life. Exercise designed to prevent falls can reduce CaF, but the effects are usually short-lived. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) can reduce CaF for longer but is not readily available in the community and unlikely to prevent falls. A multidomain intervention that combines CBT, motivational interviewing and exercise could be the long-term solution to treat CaF and reduce falls in older people with CaF. This paper describes the design of a randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of two different 12 week self-managed eHealth programmes to reduce CaF compared with an active control.
A total of 246 participants (82 per group) aged 65 and over, with substantial concerns about falls or balance will be recruited from the community. They will be randomised into: (1) myCompass-Own Your Balance (OYB) (online CBT programme) intervention or (2) myCompass-OYB plus StandingTall intervention (an eHealth balance exercise programme), both including motivational interviewing and online health education or (3) an active control group (online health education alone). The primary outcome is change in CaF over 12 months from baseline of both intervention groups compared with control. The secondary outcomes at 2, 6 and 12 months include balance confidence, physical activity, habitual daily activity, enjoyment of physical activity, social activity, exercise self-efficacy, rate of falls, falls health literacy, mood, psychological well-being, quality of life, exercise self-efficacy, programme adherence, healthcare use, user experience and attitudes towards the programme. An intention-to-treat analysis will be applied. The healthcare funder’s perspective will be adopted for the economic evaluation if appropriate.
Ethical approval was obtained from the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2019/ETH12840). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals, local and international conferences, community events and media releases.
ACTRN12621000440820.
(1) To identify, evaluate and summarize evidence about the objectives and characteristics of mentoring programmes for specialized nurses (SNs) or nurse navigators (NNs) and advanced practice nurses (APNs) and (2) to identify the effectiveness of these programmes.
A systematic review based on PRISMA guidelines.
From November 2022 until 7 December 2022, four databases were searched: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library.
Study selection was performed independently by two researchers. Disagreements were discussed until consensus was reached. Data extraction was undertaken for included studies. Data synthesis was conducted using narrative analysis. Quality appraisal was performed using the Critical Appraisal Skill Programme (CASP) and Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).
Twelve articles were included, all of which focused on mentoring programmes for APNs. Different forms of mentorship (e.g. (in)formal mentorship, work shadowing, workshops) were reported. Studies reported positive outcomes on job retention (n = 5), job satisfaction (n = 6), skills improvement (n = 7), satisfaction with the programme (n = 7) and confidence improvement (n = 4) among participants of mentoring programmes.
There is a lack of uniformity and consistency in various elements of mentoring programmes. Further research is needed to develop mentoring programmes for both APNs and SNs/NNs in a systematic and theoretically underpinned manner. It is necessary to establish a thorough evaluation methodology, preferably using a mixed methods design that includes both a qualitative process evaluation and a comprehensive outcome evaluation using validated questionnaires, taking into account the NN/APN, the interprofessional team and organizational level.
The synthesis of evidence may be useful to organizations developing and implementing mentoring programmes for both SN/NN and APN. The development of a mentoring programme for nursing experts should be considered a complex intervention that requires theoretical frameworks and contextual considerations.
Not applicable, as no patients or public were involved.
FreshRSS 