Skill-Mix Changes Targeting Health Promotion and Prevention Interventions and Effects on Outcomes in all Settings (Except Hospitals): Overview of Reviews.

Objectives: Skill-mix changes to step up health promotion and prevention are increasing, but there is limited evidence on their effects. Methods: Overview of reviews, based on a protocol. The search was carried out in six databases, screening was performed ensuring high interrater reliability. All countries, health professions and lay workers in all settings (except hospitals) were included, quality appraisals performed. Results: A total of 31 systematic reviews were included. Expanded roles performing outreach (e.g., home visits) had mostly positive effects on access and health outcomes, primarily for hard-to-reach groups. Task-shifting in colorectal or skin cancer screenings (performed by advanced practice nurses) were suggested effective; supporting roles (by community health workers) increased uptake in screenings, but based on limited evidence. Expanded roles of various professions focusing on lifestyle modification showed promising effects in most reviews, including weight, diet, smoking cessation and physical activity. Reviews on cost-effectiveness were based on limited evidence. Conclusion: Promising skill-mix changes included expanded roles providing lifestyle modifying interventions, task-shifting, and outreach roles for hard-to-reach groups, whereas evidence on costs was limited.

A workplace organisational intervention to improve hospital nurses' and physicians' mental health: study protocol for the Magnet4Europe wait list cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The increasing burden of mental distress reported by healthcare professionals is a matter of serious concern and there is a growing recognition of the role of the workplace in creating this problem. Magnet hospitals, a model shown to attract and retain staff in US research, creates positive work environments that aim to support the well-being of healthcare professionals. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Magnet4Europe is a cluster randomised controlled trial, with wait list controls, designed to evaluate the effects of organisational redesign, based on the Magnet model, on nurses' and physicians' well-being in general acute care hospitals, using a multicomponent implementation strategy. The study will be conducted in more than 60 general acute care hospitals in Belgium, England, Germany, Ireland, Norway and Sweden. The primary outcome is burnout among nurses and physicians, assessed in longitudinal surveys of nurses and physicians at participating hospitals. Additional data will be collected from them on perceived work environments, patient safety and patient quality of care and will be triangulated with data from medical records, including case mix-adjusted in-hospital mortality. The process of implementation will be evaluated using qualitative data from focus group and key informant interviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee Research UZ/KU Leuven, Belgium; additionally, ethics approval is obtained in all other participating countries either through a central or decentral authority. Findings will be disseminated at conferences, through peer-reviewed manuscripts and via social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10196901.

[Public Reporting on long-term Care Facilities in Germany: Current State and Evaluation of Quality Information]. / Public Reporting über stationäre Pflegeeinrichtungen in Deutschland: Eine Bestandsaufnahme und Bewertung der Qualitätsinformationen.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about public reporting on long-term care facilities. In this study, we (1) identify the websites that are available for a search on long-term care facilities in Germany, (2) describe them systematically with regard to general information and range of functions, 3) capture the information on quality available on the websites and 4) evaluate the extent to which they can be useful for those in need. METHODS: 1) Systematic internet search to identify the websites. 2) Analysis of the websites with regard to defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. 3) Data collection from the included websites. 4) Description of the general content and the range of functions of the websites. 5) Collection of quality-related information on long-term care facilities (structure, process and outcome quality, costs, quality inspections results, user feedback). 6) Evaluation of the usefulness of information by analyzing the information using a catalogue of criteria. RESULTS: A total of 24 websites were identified with information on long-term care facilities. Only 4 websites allowed a direct online comparison of several facilities and 17% allowed consumer feedback online. All websites provided information on structural quality, but none on the outcome quality. Across all websites, the usefulness of information for the consumers amounted to 19%. The thematic area on location and accessibility of a facility offered relatively detailed information (79%), while only to 9% was dedicated to the thematic area on care. CONCLUSION: There is a large number of websites that can be searched for information on long-term care facilities. They show a range of heterogeneous functions and information. More websites should offer a function of comparison of multiple facilities. With regard to the information available, consumer preferences do not yet seem to be sufficiently taken into account. Further researches should focus on the evaluation of the impact of outcome quality on decision-making and the analysis of the validity of consumer feedback.