Conectar
Evidences have demonstrated the effectiveness of early essential newborn care. However, the implementation of early essential newborn care is suboptimal. The aim is to identify and synthesise the barriers and facilitators impacting the implementation of early essential newborn care in low- and middle-income countries.
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CNKI, Wan Fang Data, SinoMed and Google Scholar.
Two authors independently screened, performed quality assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and extracted data. This review includes papers that reported the barriers and facilitators of implementing early essential newborn care in low- and middle-income countries from the view of healthcare providers. Barriers and facilitators were coded according to the consolidated framework for implementation research in a deductive way and then been inducted into five common themes. This review followed synthesis without meta-analysis reporting guideline.
A total of 28 studies were included. Five inductive common themes influencing implementing early essential newborn care in low- and middle-income countries were system-level healthcare factors, healthcare providers’ knowledge and beliefs, the requirements of mothers or families, adapting to routine practice and the working climate of organisation.
The factors were from system level, facility level and individual level and were inducted into five themes. Based on this review, decision-makers could tailor implementing strategies to narrow the gap between the evidence and implementation.
The study offers guidance for health professionals to identify barriers and facilitators in implementing early essential newborn care and make tailored strategies when implementing early essential newborn care.
No patient or public contributions.
To explore the actual experience of psychological distress of adult women of reproductive age at different stages after breast cancer diagnosis.
Qualitative.
Eighty-one patients with breast cancer-related distress thermometer scores >4 were selected using a purposive sampling method. Patients were divided into newly diagnosed and 1-, 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-month groups according to time since diagnosis and then interviewed. A phenomenological approach was adopted to analyse interview content, and different themes were extracted.
Women exhibited different levels of psychological distress depending on the time since diagnosis, with newly diagnosed patients showing the highest distress. Within 1 year post-diagnosis, different events caused patients distress. Themes extracted at new diagnosis and 1-, 3-, 6-, 9- and 12 months post-diagnosis included sadness and disbelief, loss of control, optimistic but concerned, physical and mental exhaustion, difficulties returning to society and limited sexual intimacy, respectively; all groups expressed reproductive concerns.
Clinical nurses should focus on different psychologically distressing events to provide targeted interventions at distinct phases. For women of childbearing age, clinical nurses should pay particular attention to patients' marriage and reproductive concerns.
During the year after a breast cancer diagnosis, patients of childbearing age experience events that cause psychological distress that differ depending on time since diagnosis. Nurses should focus on core stressful events and perform specific nursing interventions.
To provide holistic care, nurses should consider the psychological and emotional changes patients may undergo. For women of childbearing age, clinical nurses should pay particular attention to patients' marriage and fertility concerns, and be able to provide evidence-based professional guidance on reproductive preservation techniques.
The study was reported using the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research guidelines.
Patients contributed to data collection through interviews.
by Priscila Ceolin Meneghetti, Junying Li, Paulo Sérgio Borella, Gustavo Mendonça, Luiz Henrique Burnett Jr
This study aimed to compare the accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions using seven different scanbodies and four intraoral scanners. A 3D-printed maxillary model with six implants and their respective multi-unit abutments was used for this study. Seven scanbodies (SB1, SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, and SB7) and four intraoral scanners (Primescan®, Omnican®, Trios 3®, and Trios 4®) were assessed. Each combination group was scanned ten times and a dental lab scanner (D2000, 3Shape) was used as a reference. All scans were exported as STL files, imported into Convince software (3Shape) for alignment, and later into Blender software, where their 3D positions were analyzed using a Python script. The 3D deviation, angular deviation, and linear distance between implants #3 and #14 were also measured. Accuracy was measured in terms of “trueness” (scanbody 3D deviation between intraoral scan and desktop scan). Kruskal-Wallis followed by the Bonferroni correction was used to analyze the data (⍺ = .05). The study found statistically significant differences in digital impression accuracy among the scanners and scanbodies (p
FreshRSS 