RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly affected nurses globally. As frontline workers, nurses faced increased responsibilities amid challenges such as isolation, infection risks, family obligations and disrupted social support systems. Coping with these challenges was associated with adverse mental health outcomes. AIM/QUESTION: This perspective paper examines a collaboration between two schools of nursing in the United States and India to address these mental health challenges. METHODS: Faculty from both institutions identified key mental health topics, leading to five webinars that delved into topics such as acute and long-term impacts of COVID-19 on nurse mental health, coping mechanisms, caregiving responsibilities and children's needs during the pandemic. RESULTS: Impressively, over 11,000 nurses from 60 countries engaged, fostering a global platform for sharing evidence-based knowledge, experiences and strategies. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This partnership exemplifies the value of international collaboration. By pooling resources and expertise across cultural contexts, the initiative not only disseminated crucial knowledge but also cultivated a sense of global community among nurses. The success of this collaboration underscores the potential of such global partnerships for healthcare institutions worldwide, offering avenues to share best practices and enhance support systems for nurses confronting similar crises globally.
RESUMEN
Wound closure using topical negative pressure (TNP) has been reported to be effective, but equipment costs can be prohibitive in resource-challenged countries. Because nonhealing wounds are exceedingly common in developing countries such as India, the ability to optimize wound care with limited resources is very important. To investigate the feasibility and efficacy of providing TNP in an Indian medical referral center, a randomized controlled trial comparing a locally constructed TNP device (treatment) to wet-to-dry gauze dressings (control) was conducted. Eligible study participants (N = 48) were recruited from the inpatient wards. Wound etiologies included diabetic foot ulcers (15), pressure ulcers (11), cellulitis/fasciitis (11), and "other" (11). Following enrollment, wound size was assessed using computer-aided measurements of digital photographs and block-randomized to the study arms using a concealed allocation table. Wounds in both treatment groups were débrided before dressing application and patients were followed until wound closure or being lost to follow-up for an average of 26.3 days (+/- 18.5) in the control and 33.1 days (+/- 37.3) in the treatment group. No statistically significant differences in time to closure between the two treatment groups were observed except in a subset analysis of pressure ulcers (mean 10 +/- 7.11 days for treatment and 27 +/- 10.6 days in control group, P = 0.05). Direct costs to close a pressure ulcer also were lower in the TNP than in the control group. A review of the literature suggests the outcomes obtained using a locally constructed TNP device are similar to those obtained using commercially available devices. As a result of this study, a dedicated tissue viability team has been established to identify wounds suitable for TNP, oversee treatment, monitor the need for surgical débridement, and employ wound healing principles and technology appropriately. These results suggest that inexpensive materials can be utilized for TNP wound closure in a developing country.