Evaluation of a COVID-19 fundamental nursing care guideline versus usual care: The COVID-NURSE cluster randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To evaluate the impact of usual care plus a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care only for patients in hospital with COVID-19 on patient experience, care quality, functional ability, treatment outcomes, nurses' moral distress, patient health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: Parallel two-arm, cluster-level randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Between 18th January and 20th December 2021, we recruited (i) adults aged 18 years and over with COVID-19, excluding those invasively ventilated, admitted for at least three days or nights in UK Hospital Trusts; (ii) nurses caring for them. We randomly assigned hospitals to use a fundamental nursing care guideline and usual care or usual care only. Our patient-reported co-primary outcomes were the Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire and four scales from the Quality from the Patient Perspective Questionnaire. We undertook intention-to-treat analyses. RESULTS: We randomized 15 clusters and recruited 581 patient and 418 nurse participants. Primary outcome data were available for 570-572 (98.1%-98.5%) patient participants in 14 clusters. We found no evidence of between-group differences on any patient, nurse or economic outcomes. We found between-group differences over time, in favour of the intervention, for three of our five co-primary outcomes, and a significant interaction on one primary patient outcome for ethnicity (white British vs. other) and allocated group in favour of the intervention for the 'other' ethnicity subgroup. CONCLUSION: We did not detect an overall difference in patient experience for a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care. We have indications the guideline may have aided sustaining good practice over time and had a more positive impact on non-white British patients' experience of care. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: We cannot recommend the wholescale implementation of our guideline into routine nursing practice. Further intervention development, feasibility, pilot and evaluation studies are required. IMPACT: Fundamental nursing care drives patient experience but is severely impacted in pandemics. Our guideline was not superior to usual care, albeit it may sustain good practice and have a positive impact on non-white British patients' experience of care. REPORTING METHOD: CONSORT and CONSERVE. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients with experience of hospitalization with COVID-19 were involved in guideline development and writing, trial management and interpretation of findings.

Fundamental nursing care in patients with the SARS-CoV-2 virus: results from the 'COVID-NURSE' mixed methods survey into nurses' experiences of missed care and barriers to care.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience of nursing care is associated with safety, care quality, treatment outcomes, costs and service use. Effective nursing care includes meeting patients' fundamental physical, relational and psychosocial needs, which may be compromised by the challenges of SARS-CoV-2. No evidence-based nursing guidelines exist for patients with SARS-CoV-2. We report work to develop such a guideline. Our aim was to identify views and experiences of nursing staff on necessary nursing care for inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 (not invasively ventilated) that is omitted or delayed (missed care) and any barriers to this care. METHODS: We conducted an online mixed methods survey structured according to the Fundamentals of Care Framework. We recruited a convenience sample of UK-based nursing staff who had nursed inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 not invasively ventilated. We asked respondents to rate how well they were able to meet the needs of SARS-CoV-2 patients, compared to non-SARS-CoV-2 patients, in 15 care categories; select from a list of barriers to care; and describe examples of missed care and barriers to care. We analysed quantitative data descriptively and qualitative data using Framework Analysis, integrating data in side-by-side comparison tables. RESULTS: Of 1062 respondents, the majority rated mobility, talking and listening, non-verbal communication, communicating with significant others, and emotional wellbeing as worse for patients with SARS-CoV-2. Eight barriers were ranked within the top five in at least one of the three care areas. These were (in rank order): wearing Personal Protective Equipment, the severity of patients' conditions, inability to take items in and out of isolation rooms without donning and doffing Personal Protective Equipment, lack of time to spend with patients, lack of presence from specialised services e.g. physiotherapists, lack of knowledge about SARS-CoV-2, insufficient stock, and reluctance to spend time with patients for fear of catching SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Our respondents identified nursing care areas likely to be missed for patients with SARS-CoV-2, and barriers to delivering care. We are currently evaluating a guideline of nursing strategies to address these barriers, which are unlikely to be exclusive to this pandemic or the environments represented by our respondents. Our results should, therefore, be incorporated into global pandemic planning.

Mini-AFTERc: a controlled pilot trial of a nurse-led psychological intervention for fear of breast cancer recurrence.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing the Mini-AFTERc intervention. DESIGN: Non-randomised cluster-controlled pilot trial. SETTING: Four NHS out-patient breast cancer centres in Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-two women who had successfully completed primary treatment for breast cancer were screened for moderate levels of fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). Forty-five were eligible (17 intervention and 28 control) and 34 completed 3-month follow-up (15 intervention and 21 control). INTERVENTION: Mini-AFTERc, a single brief (30 min) structured telephone discussion with a specialist breast cancer nurse (SBCN) trained to target the antecedents of FCR. OUTCOMES: Feasibility and acceptability of Mini-AFTERc and the study design were assessed via recruitment, consent, retention rates, patient outcomes (measured at baseline, 2, 4, and 12 weeks), and post-study interviews with participants and SBCNs, which were guided by Normalisation Process Theory. RESULTS: Mini-AFTERc was acceptable to patients and SBCNs. SBCNs believe the implementation of Mini-AFTERc to be feasible and an extension of discussions that already happen routinely. SBCNs believe delivery, however, at the scale required would be challenging given current competing demands for their time. Recruitment was impacted by variability in the follow-up practices of cancer centres and COVID-19 lockdown. Consent and follow-up procedures worked well, and retention rates were high. CONCLUSIONS: The study provided invaluable information about the potential challenges and solutions for testing the Mini-AFTERc intervention more widely where limiting high FCR levels is an important goal following recovery from primary breast cancer treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT0376382 . Registered on 4 December 2018.

A controlled pilot trial of a nurse-led intervention (Mini-AFTERc) to manage fear of cancer recurrence in patients affected by breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is common in people affected by breast cancer. FCR is associated with increased health service and medication use, anxiety, depression and reduced quality of life. Existing interventions for FCR are time and resource intensive, making implementation in a National Health Service (NHS) setting challenging. To effectively manage FCR in current clinical practice, less intensive FCR interventions are required. Mini-AFTERc is a structured 30-min counselling intervention delivered over the telephone and is designed to normalise moderate FCR levels by targeting unhelpful behaviours and misconceptions about cancer recurrence.This multi-centre non-randomised controlled pilot trial will investigate the feasibility of delivering the Mini-AFTERc intervention, its acceptability and usefulness, in relation to specialist breast cancer nurses (SBCNs) and patients. This protocol describes the rationale, methods and analysis plan for this pilot trial of the Mini-AFTERc intervention in everyday practice. METHODS: This study will run in four breast cancer centres in NHS Scotland, two intervention and two control centres. SBCNs at intervention centres will be trained to deliver the Mini-AFTERc intervention. Female patients who have completed primary breast cancer treatment in the previous 6 months will be screened for moderate FCR (FCR4 score: 10­14). Participants at intervention centres will receive the Mini-AFTERc intervention within 2 weeks of recruitment. SBCNs will audio record the intervention telephone discussions with participants. Fidelity of intervention implementation will be assessed from audio recordings. All participants will complete three separate follow-up questionnaires assessing changes in FCR, anxiety, depression and quality of life over 3 months. Normalisation process theory (NPT) will form the framework for semi-structured interviews with 20% of patients and all SBCNs. Interviews will explore participants' experience of the study, acceptability and usefulness of the intervention and factors influencing implementation within clinical practice. The ADePT process will be adopted to systematically problem solve and refine the trial design. DISCUSSION: Findings will provide evidence for the potential effectiveness, fidelity, acceptability and practicality of the Mini-AFTERc intervention, and will inform the design and development of a large randomised controlled trial (RCT). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT0376382. Registered 4th December 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03763825.