RESUMEN
The registered nurse has crucial preventative, therapeutic, sociocultural, and advocacy roles in promoting quality holistic patient-centred palliative care. This paper examines, describes, and analyses this multifaceted role from an antipodean perspective. We conducted systematic searches using PubMed, Google Scholar, government guidelines, authoritative body regulations, quality control guidelines, and government portals pertaining to palliative care nursing in Australia. This paper relies upon the information garnered from publications, reports, and guidelines resulting from these searches and analyses. The fundamental principles and guiding values of palliative care (and nursing) and the raison d'etre for palliative care as a discipline are underscored and expanded on. Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) pertaining to palliative end-of-life (EOL) nursing care and associated services are discussed. The relevant NMBA nursing standards that RNs need to have to administer opioids/narcotics in palliative care are summarised. The identification of patients who need EOL care, holistic person-centred care planning for them, and consultative multidisciplinary palliative clinical decision making are discussed in the palliative care context. Several components of advance care planning apropos health deterioration and conflicts are discussed. Several aspects of EOL care, especially palliative nursing care, are analysed using research evidence, established nursing and palliative care standards, and the Australian EOL CPGs.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a complex and heterogeneous group of acute and chronic lung diseases of several known and unknown causes. While clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have been recently updated, CPG for ILD other than IPF are needed. METHODS: A working group of multidisciplinary clinicians familiar with clinical management of ILD (pulmonologists, radiologist, pathologist, and rheumatologist) and three epidemiologists selected by the leaderships of Indian Chest Society and National College of Chest Physicians, India, posed questions to address the clinically relevant situation. A systematic search was performed on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. A modified GRADE approach was used to grade the evidence. The working group discussed the evidence and reached a consensus of opinions for each question following face-to-face discussions. RESULTS: Statements have been made for each specific question and the grade of evidence has been provided after performing a systematic review of literature. For most of the questions addressed, the available evidence was insufficient and of low to very low quality. The consensus of the opinions of the working group has been presented as statements for the questions and not as an evidence-based CPG for the management of ILD. CONCLUSION: This document provides the guidelines made by consensus of opinions among experts following discussion of systematic review of evidence pertaining to the specific questions for management of ILD other than IPF. It is hoped that this document will help the clinician understand the accumulated evidence and help better management of idiopathic and nonidiopathic interstitial pneumonias.
RESUMEN
With the aim to explore how improvement science is understood, taught, practiced, and its impact on quality healthcare across Europe, the Improvement Science Training for European Healthcare Workers (ISTEW) project "Improvement Science Training for European Healthcare Workers" was funded by the European Commission and integrated by 7 teams from different European countries. As part of the project, a narrative literature review was conducted between 2008 and 2019, including documents in all partners' languages from 26 databases. Data collection and analysis involved a common database. Validation took place through partners' discussions. Referring to healthcare improvement science (HIS), a variety of terms, tools, and techniques were reported with no baseline definition or specific framework. All partner teams were informed about the non-existence of a specific term equivalent to HIS in their mother languages, except for the English-speaking countries. A lack of consensus, regarding the understanding and implementation of HIS into the healthcare and educational contexts was found. Our findings have brought to light the gap existing in HIS within Europe, far from other nations, such as the US, where there is a clearer HIS picture. As a consequence, the authors suggest further developing the standardization of HIS understanding and education in Europe.