Top 10 Signs and Symptoms of Psychotropic Adverse Drug Events to Monitor in Residents of Long-Term Care Facilities.

OBJECTIVES: To produce a consensus list of the top 10 signs and symptoms suggestive of adverse drug events (ADEs) for monitoring in residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) who use antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, or antidepressants. DESIGN: A 3-round Delphi study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Geriatricians, psychiatrists, pharmacologists, general practitioners, pharmacists, nurses, and caregivers from 13 Asia Pacific, European, and North American countries. METHODS: Three survey rounds were completed between April and June 2023. In Round 1, participants indicated their level of agreement on a 9-point Likert scale on whether 41 signs or symptoms identified in a systematic review should be routinely monitored. Participants considered signs and symptoms that reduce quality of life or cause significant harm, are observable or measurable by nurses or care workers, and can be assessed at a single time point. Round 1 statements were included in a list for prioritization in Round 3 if ≥ 70% of participants responded ≥7 on the Likert scale. Statements were excluded if ≤ 30% of participants responded ≥7. In Round 2, participants indicated their level of agreement with statements that did not reach initial consensus, plus amended statements based on Round 1 participant feedback. Round 2 statements were included in Round 3 if ≥ 50% of the participants responded ≥7 on the Likert scale. In Round 3, participants prioritized the signs and symptoms. RESULTS: Forty-four participants (93.6%) completed all 3 rounds. Four of 41 signs and symptoms reached consensus for inclusion after Round 1, and 9 after Round 2. The top 10 signs and symptoms prioritized in Round 3 were recent falls, daytime drowsiness or sleepiness, abnormal movements (eg, shaking or stiffness), confusion or disorientation, balance problems, dizziness, postural hypotension, reduced self-care, restlessness, and dry mouth. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The top 10 signs and symptoms provide a basis for proactive monitoring for psychotropic ADEs.

Medication administration in aged care facilities: A mixed-methods systematic review.

AIM(S): To synthesize aged care provider, resident and residents' family members' perspectives and experiences of medication administration in aged care facilities; to determine the incidence of medication administration errors, and the impact of medication administration on quality of care and resident-centredness in aged care facilities. DESIGN: A mixed-methods systematic review. PROSPERO ID: CRD42023426990. DATA SOURCES: The AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science core collection databases were searched in June 2023. REVIEW METHODS: Included studies were independently screened, selected and appraised by two researchers. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist was followed, with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for critical appraisal. Convergent synthesis of data, thematic synthesis and meta-analysis were performed. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight studies were included (33 qualitative, 85 quantitative and 10 mixed-methods). Five themes were formulated, including 1) Staffing concerns, 2) The uncertain role of residents, 3) Medication-related decision-making, 4) Use of electronic medication administration records and 5) Medication administration errors. Educational interventions for aged care workers significantly reduced medication administration errors, examined across five studies (OR = 0.37, 95%CI 0.28-0.50, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Medication administration in aged care facilities is challenging and complex on clinical and interpersonal levels. Clinical processes, medication errors and safety remain focal points for practice. However, more active consideration of residents' autonomy and input by aged care workers and providers is needed to address medication administration's interpersonal and psychosocial aspects. New directions for future research should examine the decision-making behind dose form modification, aged care workers' definitions of medication omission and practical methods to support residents' and their family members' engagement during medication administration. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: It is important that medication administration in aged care facilities be more clearly acknowledged as both a clinical and interpersonal task. More attention is warranted regarding aged care workers clinical decision-making, particularly concerning dose form modification, covert administration and medication omissions. Resident-centred care approaches that support resident and family engagement around medication administration may improve adherence, satisfaction and quality of care. IMPACT: What Problem Did the Study Address? Medication administration in aged care facilities is a complex clinical and interpersonal activity. Still, to date, no attempts have been made to synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence around this practice. There is a need to establish what evidence exists around the perspectives and experiences of aged care workers, residents and resident's family members to understand the challenges, interpersonal opportunities and risks during medication administration. What Were the Main Findings? There is a lack of empirical evidence around resident-centred care approaches to medication administration, and how residents and their families could be enabled to have more input. Dose form modification occurred overtly and covertly as part of medication administration, not just as a method for older adults with swallowing difficulties, but to enforce adherence with prescribed medications. Medication administration errors typically included medication omission as a category of error, despite some omissions stemming from a clear rationale for medication omission and resident input. WHERE AND ON WHOM WILL THE RESEARCH HAVE AN IMPACT?: The findings of this systematic review contribute to aged care policy and practice regarding medication administration and engagement with older adults. This review presents findings that provide a starting point for aged care workers in regards to professional development and reflection on practice, particularly around clinical decision-making on dose form modification, medication administration errors and the tension on enabling resident input into medication administration. For researchers, this review highlights the need to develop resident-centred care approaches and interventions, and to assess whether these can positively impact medication administration, resident engagement, adherence with prescribed medications and quality of care. REPORTING METHOD: This systematic review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (Page et al., 2021). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution to this systematic review.

Measuring Healthcare Experiences Among People With Intellectual Disability: A Rapid Evidence Synthesis of Tools And Methods.

OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) collect essential data for service and system-wide quality improvement and performance monitoring toward value-based care. However, the experiences of people with intellectual disability, who have high healthcare utilization couple with poorer outcomes, are often omitted from system-wide PREMs and service-wide PREMs data. The use of PREMs instruments for data collection among people with intellectual disability has not been explored. This review aimed to identify and synthesize measurement tools and approaches that have been used to gather patient-reported experience data from people with intellectual disability. METHODS: Rapid evidence assessment was used, in which comprehensive search strategies were applied to electronic databases and gray literature. Narrative synthesis was used with the included articles to address the review aim. RESULTS: A total of 48 documents were included; 26 peer-reviewed journal articles and 22 articles from gray literature. Patient-reported experiences have been gathered from people with intellectual disabilities in relation to specific services or encounters, predominantly using qualitative methods. To date, there is an absence of targeted service- or system-wide surveys. Existing clinic- and condition-specific instruments provide insight for broader application. CONCLUSIONS: Patient experience assessment among people with intellectual disability requires consideration of (1) how individuals are identified and approached, (2) the content, design and structure of measurement instruments, and (3) the process by which data are collected, and (4) how it may be applied to create change. Despite the collection of patient experience data from people with intellectual disability, there is little research available about how this information is later used to support health service improvement. Applying PREMs for quality improvement is critical to realize the improvements to healthcare provision required for people with intellectual disability toward equitable care quality.

Perspectives on telehealth implementation in Australia: An exploratory qualitative study with practice managers and general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of understanding regarding the impact of telehealth on clinical delivery and the feasibility of sustained implementation by health services. The COVID-19 pandemic provided an ideal opportunity to identify factors related to the implementation of telehealth. This study assessed factors that influenced telehealth implementation during COVID-19 in the Western region of Victoria, Australia, from the perspectives of practice managers and general practitioners (GPs). METHODS: Employing a qualitative approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 GPs and 11 practice managers across metropolitan and rural settings in the Western region of Victoria, Australia. Interviews were conducted between December 2021 to June 2022, which included periods during and beyond the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Themes were synthesised using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, which comprised five domains: innovation, inner setting, outer setting, individuals and implementation process. An additional domain related to billing and finances was added. RESULTS: The innovation domain revealed that telehealth was identified by both stakeholder groups as a critical tool for improving healthcare access for vulnerable patients. GPs highlighted the role of telehealth in follow-up care and the need for extended telephone consultation services. For the implementation process, both stakeholder groups identified a shift in attitudes among GPs from reluctance to acceptance of telehealth. In terms of outer setting, constant changes in regulations posed challenges to administrative staff. Practice managers faced difficulties in acquiring information on changes, but those with robust professional networks were well supported. Initial loss of incentive funding and government-imposed billing methods posed hurdles for clinics. Both stakeholder groups highlighted the need for education around videoconference and a standardised telehealth platform. CONCLUSION: Evolving telehealth regulations during the emergence of COVID-19 posed financial, operational and administrative challenges to primary care clinics. To ensure sustainability, policymakers should improve stakeholder communication, set interoperability standards, and ensure sustainable funding for telehealth.

The impact of elder abuse training on subacute health providers and older adults: study protocol for a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Elder abuse often goes unreported and undetected. Older people may be ashamed, fearful, or otherwise reticent to disclose abuse, and many health providers are not confident in asking about it. In the No More Shame study, we will evaluate a co-designed, multi-component intervention that aims to improve health providers' recognition, response, and referral of elder abuse. METHODS: This is a single-blinded, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. Ten subacute hospital sites (i.e. clusters) across Australia will be allocated 1:1, stratified by state to a multi-component intervention comprising a training programme for health providers, implementation of a screening tool and use of site champions, or no additional training or support. Outcomes will be collected at baseline, 4 and 9 months. Our co-primary outcomes are change in health providers' knowledge of responding to elder abuse and older people's sense of safety and quality of life. We will include all inpatients at participating sites, aged 65 + (or aged 50 + if Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander), who are able to provide informed consent and all unit staff who provide direct care to older people; a sample size of at least 92 health providers and 612 older people will provide sufficient power for primary analyses. DISCUSSION: This will be one of the first trials in the world to evaluate a multi-component elder abuse intervention. If successful, it will provide the most robust evidence base to date for health providers to draw on to create a safe environment for reporting, response, and referral. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR, ACTRN12623000676617p . Registered 22 June 2023.

Co-designing strategies to improve advance care planning among people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds with cancer: iCanCarePlan study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) describes the process of supporting individuals at any age or stage of health to consider and share their personal values, life goals, and preferences regarding future health care. Engaging in ACP is associated with better-quality of care in which people receive care in lines with their wishes, values and preferences. Direct translations of ACP guides and resources do not attend to the considerable inter- and intra-ethnic variations in cultural and religious or spiritual beliefs that shape preferences among people from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds. ICanCarePlan is a three-year project that aims to determine the prevalence of ACP documentation among people from CALD backgrounds with cancer, identify resources available and their use to support ACP among CALD communities, identify barriers and facilitators of person-centred ACP, and to develop, through co-design with consumers and clinicians, approaches that enhance the process ACP for people from CALD backgrounds. METHOD: A mixed-method sequential approach will be used comprising of four studies. Study one is retrospective medical record review of approximately 1500 medical records to establish the prevalence of ACP documentation among CALD patient records in cancer services. Study two is a document analysis synthesising the resources available in the Australian health system to support ACP. Study three is a qualitative study with healthcare staff and consumers to explore barriers and enablers of person-centred ACP. Evidence generated from studies one to three will inform the conduct of co-design with stakeholders to develop approaches to improve ACP processes among CALD communities. Language, technical and financial support for meaningful involvement with consumers from CALD backgrounds throughout this project is outlined. A plan for distress management is also made due to sensitive nature of the topic. The research project has also established a project steering group consisting of three consumer members who are from CALD backgrounds. DISCUSSION: The project will address a national priority issue for a growing population of CALD communities in Australia. The project will provide novel evidence of ACP among CALD communities and novel strategies developed with stakeholders to enhance uptake and experiences of ACP.

Taxonomy development methods regarding patient safety in health sciences - A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Taxonomies are needed for automated analysis of clinical data in healthcare. Few reviews of the taxonomy development methods used in health sciences are found. This systematic review aimed to describe the scope of the available taxonomies relative to patient safety, the methods used for taxonomy development, and the strengths and limitations of the methods. The purpose of this systematic review is to guide future taxonomy development projects. METHODS: The CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies from January 2012 to April 25, 2023. Two authors selected the studies using inclusion and exclusion criteria and critical appraisal checklists. The data were analysed inductively, and the results were reported narratively. RESULTS: The studies (n = 13) across healthcare concerned mainly taxonomies of adverse events and medication safety but little for specialised fields and information technology. Critical appraisal indicated inadequate reporting of the used taxonomy development methods. Ten phases of taxonomy development were identified: (1) defining purpose and (2) the theory base for development, (3) relevant data sources' identification, (4) main terms' identification and definitions, (5) items' coding and pooling, (6) reliability and validity evaluation of coding and/or codes, (7) development of a hierarchical structure, (8) testing the structure, (9) piloting the taxonomy and (10) reporting application and validation of the final taxonomy. Seventeen statistical tests and seven software systems were utilised, but automated data extraction methods were used rarely. Multimethod and multi-stakeholder approach, code- and hierarchy testing and piloting were strengths and time consumption and small samples in testing limitations. CONCLUSION: New taxonomies are needed on diverse specialities and information technology related to patient safety. Structured method is needed for taxonomy development, reporting and appraisal to strengthen taxonomies' quality. A new guide was proposed for taxonomy development, for which testing is required. Prospero registration number CRD42023411022.

Co-design of an intervention to improve patient participation in discharge medication communication.

Patients can experience medication-related harm and hospital readmission because they do not understand or adhere to post-hospital medication instructions. Increasing patient medication literacy and, in turn, participation in medication conversations could be a solution. The purposes of this study were to co-design and test an intervention to enhance patient participation in hospital discharge medication communication. In terms of methods, co-design, a collaborative approach where stakeholders design solutions to problems, was used to develop a prototype medication communication intervention. First, our consumer and healthcare professional stakeholders generated intervention ideas. Next, inpatients, opinion leaders, and academic researchers collaborated to determine the most pertinent and feasible intervention ideas. Finally, the prototype intervention was shown to six intended end-users (i.e. hospital patients) who underwent usability interviews and completed the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire. The final intervention comprised of a suite of three websites: (i) a medication search engine; (ii) resources to help patients manage their medications once home; and (iii) a question builder tool. The intervention has been tested with intended end-users and results of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire have shown that the intervention is acceptable. Identified usability issues have been addressed. In conclusion, this co-designed intervention provides patients with trustworthy resources that can help them to understand medication information and ask medication-related questions, thus promoting medication literacy and patient participation. In turn, this intervention could enhance patients' medication self-efficacy and healthcare utilization. Using a co-design approach ensured authentic consumer and other stakeholder engagement, while allowing opinion leaders and researchers to ensure that a feasible intervention was developed.

Decision-making about changing medications across transitions of care: Opportunities for enhanced patient and family engagement.

BACKGROUND: Older patients often have complex medication regimens, which change as they move across transitions of care. Engagement of older patients and families in making medication decisions across transitions of care is important for safe and high-quality medication management. AIMS: To explore decision-making between health professionals, older patients and families about medication changes across transitions of care, and to examine how patient and family engagement is enacted in the process of decision-making in relation to these medication changes. METHODS: A focused ethnographic design was undertaken with semi-structured interviews, observations, and reflective focus groups or interviews. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted on transcribed data. The study was undertaken at a public teaching acute care hospital and a public teaching community hospital in Australia. RESULTS: In all, 182 older patients, 44 family members and 94 health professionals participated. Four themes were conceptualised from the data: different customs and routines, medication challenges, health professional interactions, and patient and family involvement. Environments had differences in their customs and routines, which increased the potential for medication delays or the substitution of unintended medications. Medication challenges included health professionals assuming that patients and families did not need information about regularly prescribed medications. Patients and families were informed about new medications after health professionals had already made decisions to prescribe these medications. Health professionals tended to work in disciplinary silos, and they had views about their role in interacting with patients and families. Patients and families were expected to take the initiative to participate in decision-making about medication changes. CONCLUSIONS: Patient movements across transitions of care can create complex and chaotic medication management situations, which lacks transparency, especially for older patients and their families. A greater focus on pre-emptive and planned discussions about medication changes will contribute to improving patient and family involvement in medication decision-making.

Health professionals' perceptions of the development needs of incident reporting software: A qualitative systematic review.

AIM: To systemically identify and synthesize information on health professionals' and students' perceptions regarding the development needs of incident reporting software. DESIGN: A systematic review of qualitative studies. DATA SOURCES: A database search was conducted using Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science and Medic without time or language limits in February 2023. REVIEW METHODS: A total of 4359 studies were identified. Qualitative studies concerning the perceptions of health professionals and students regarding the development needs of incident reporting software were included, based on screening and critical appraisal by two independent reviewers. A thematic synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: From 10 included studies, five analytical themes were analysed. Health professionals and students desired the following improvements or changes to incident reporting software: (1) the design of reporting software, (2) the anonymity of reporting, (3) the accessibility of reporting software, (4) the classification of fields and answer options and (5) feedback and tracking of reports. Wanted features included suitable reporting forms for various specialized fields that could be integrated into existing hospital information systems. Rapid, user-friendly reporting software using multiple reporting platforms and with flexible fields and predefined answer options was preferred. While anonymous reporting was favoured, the idea of reporting serious incidents with both patient and reporter names was also suggested. CONCLUSION: Health professionals and students provided concrete insights into the development needs for reporting software. Considering the underreporting of healthcare cases, the perspectives of healthcare professionals must be considered while developing user-friendly reporting tools. Reporting software that facilitates the reporting process could reduce underreporting. REPORTING METHOD: The ENTREQ reporting guideline was used to support the reporting of this systematic review. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public contribution. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The protocol is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews with register number CRD42023393804.

Approaches for enhancing patient-reported experience measurement with ethnically diverse communities: a rapid evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are used to drive and evaluate unit and organisational-level healthcare improvement, but also at a population level, these measures can be key indicators of healthcare quality. Current evidence indicates that ethnically diverse communities frequently experience poorer care quality and outcomes, with PREMs data required from this population to direct service improvement efforts. This review synthesises evidence of the methods and approaches used to promote participation in PREMs among ethnically diverse populations. METHODS: A rapid evidence appraisal (REA) methodology was utilised to identify the disparate literature on this topic. A search strategy was developed and applied to three major electronic databases in July 2022 (Medline; PsycINFO and CINAHL), in addition to websites of health agencies in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries via grey literature searches. A narrative evidence synthesis was undertaken to address the review question. RESULTS: The review resulted in 97 included studies, comprised 86 articles from electronic database searches and 11 articles from the grey literature. Data extraction and synthesis identified five strategies used in PREM instruments and processes to enhance participation among ethnically diverse communities. Strategies applied sought to better inform communities about PREMs, to create accessible PREMs instruments, to support PREMs completion and to include culturally relevant topics. Several methods were used, predominantly drawing upon bicultural workers, translation, and community outreach to access and support communities at one or more stages of design or administration of PREMs. Limited evidence was available of the effectiveness of the identified methods and strategies. PREMs topics of trust, cultural responsiveness, care navigation and coordination were identified as pertinent to and frequently explored with this population. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide a basis for a maturity model that may guide change to increase participation of ethnically diverse communities in PREMs. In the short-medium term, health systems and services must be able to recognise and respond to cultural and linguistic diversity in the population when applying existing PREMs. In the longer-term, by working in collaboration with ethnically diverse communities, systems and services may co-create adapted or novel PREMs that tackle the factors that currently inhibit uptake and completion among ethnically diverse communities.

Nurses engaging with referral letters and discharge summaries: A qualitative study.

AIMS: To investigate the ways that nurses engage with referral letters and discharge summaries, and the qualities of these documents they find valuable for safe and effective practice. DESIGN: This study comprised a qualitative, case-study design within a constructivist paradigm using convenience sampling. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with nurses to investigate their practices relating to referral letters and discharge summaries. Data collection also involved nurses' examination and evaluation of a diverse range of 10 referral letters and discharge summaries from medical records at two Australian hospitals through focus-group sessions. The data were transcribed and analysed inductively. RESULTS: In all, 67 nurses participated in interviews or focus groups. Nurses indicated they used referral letters and discharge summaries to inform their work when caring for patients at different times throughout their hospitalisation. These documents assisted them with verbal handovers, to enable them to educate patients about their condition and treatment and to provide a high standard of care. The qualities of referral letters and discharge summaries that they most valued were language and communication, an awareness of audience and clinical knowledge, as well as balancing conciseness with comprehensiveness of information. CONCLUSION: Nurses relied on referral letters and discharge summaries to ensure safe and effective patient care. They used these documents to enhance their verbal handovers, contribute to patient care and to educate the patient about their condition and treatment. They identified several qualities of these documents that assisted them in maintaining patient safety including clarity and conciseness of information. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: It is important that referral letters and discharge summaries are written clearly, concisely and comprehensively because nurses use them as key sources of evidence in planning and delivering care, and in communicating with other health professionals in relaying goals of care and implementing treatment plans. IMPACT: Nurses reported that they regularly used referral letters and discharge summaries as valuable sources of evidence throughout their patients' hospitalisation. The qualities of these documents which they most valued were language and communication styles, awareness of audience and clinical knowledge, as well as balancing conciseness with comprehensiveness of information. This research has important impact on the patient experience in relation to encouraging effective referral letter and discharge summary writing. REPORTING METHOD: We have adhered to the relevant EQUATOR guidelines through the SRQR reporting method. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

"Their Bodies Just Give It Away": A Qualitative Study of Pain Assessment in the Context of Pediatric Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Children undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) are vulnerable to pain. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine how healthcare providers and parents assessed pain and what contextual factors influenced their pain assessment practices for children hospitalized after allogeneic HSCT therapy. METHODS: A qualitative case study was conducted in a tertiary level pediatric HSCT unit in 2 phases. Semistructured interviews with parents were conducted at 30 and 90 days after HSCT therapy. Healthcare providers participated in naturalistic observations of pain-related care provided to children during their hospitalization for HSCT therapy and a semistructured interview. RESULTS: The assessment of pain after transplantation by healthcare providers and parents was predominantly reliant on the observation of children for behaviors indicative of pain, rather than the application of validated pain assessment tools. Without formal measures of the pain experience, judgments regarding the severity of children's pain were influenced by the context of high acuity of care posttransplantation and the emotional responses of healthcare providers and parents from bearing witness to children's pain. CONCLUSION: Pain assessments mostly reflected children's ability to tolerate pain, rather than a genuine measurement of how significantly pain impacted the child. IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE: This study has emphasized how the assessment of pain for children hospitalized during HSCT therapy is limited by the complexity of the clinical environment. It is recommended that validated methods of assessing pain by healthcare providers and parents be implemented into clinical practice to ensure children's pain is visible.

Nurse management of noradrenaline infusions in intensive care units: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care nurse management of noradrenaline (norepinephrine) infusions is a common and essential clinical competency for patient haemodynamic support. Nurses titrate and wean noradrenaline infusions to a target blood pressure in a dynamic, high-risk, and unpredictable environment. Titration and weaning are complex interventions, and blood pressure goals are often variable. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to examine how nurses used blood pressure targets when escalating, weaning, and titrating noradrenaline in intensive care patients admitted for haemodynamic management and explore patient blood pressure responses to changes in noradrenaline doses. METHODS: In this naturalistic observational study, noradrenaline dose changes were classified as escalation, weaning, and titration changes and analysed to explore nursing practice. The study was undertaken in two adult medical/surgical intensive care units in Melbourne, Australia. Participants included intensive care nurses and patients who received noradrenaline infusions for haemodynamic support. RESULTS: Observations of 14 nurse-patient dyads provided 25 h of blood pressure and noradrenaline dose data. Patient participants received weight-adjusted maximum noradrenaline doses of between 0.06 mcg/kg/min and 0.87 mcg/kg/minute, with those in the escalation group receiving dose increases of up to 5 mcg to achieve blood pressure goals. During weaning, patients maintained or increased their blood pressure as noradrenaline doses were decreased. Nurses consistently maintained blood pressures at higher than target goals, and despite constant fluctuations, they only documented blood pressure readings hourly. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive care nurses managed noradrenaline to achieve mean arterial pressure targets that were variable and not evidence based. The disconnection between observed blood pressure fluctuations and nurse documentation of patient blood pressures was reflected in titration practices. Discrepancies between documented and actual blood pressures raised issues about data used by nurses and doctors to inform clinical practice on noradrenaline management.

Work engagement, psychological empowerment and relational coordination in long-term care: A mixed-method examination of nurses' perceptions and experiences.

Nurse engagement, empowerment and strong relationships among staff, residents and families, are essential to attract and retain a suitably qualified and skilled nursing workforce for safe, quality care. There is, however, limited research that explores engagement, empowerment and relational coordination in long-term care (LTC). Nurses from an older persons' mental health and dementia LTC unit in Australia participated in this study. Forty-one nurses completed a survey measuring psychological empowerment, work engagement and relational coordination. Twenty-nine nurses participated in individual interviews to further explore these concepts. Although nurses reported high psychological empowerment and work engagement, their relationships with key stakeholders varied. Our findings suggest that nurses in LTC require both supports and opportunities to contribute as active members of the multiprofessional care team that includes tailored education, professional development and positive interactions within the care team. Regular support is needed to enable nurses to feel empowered, foster relationships and communication, and facilitate work engagement. Based on these findings, we suggest that it is important to find ways to ensure that all who provide care perceive that they are part of the whole care team and able to contribute to the care and well-being of people in LTC.

Systematic Review of Outcomes for Assessment of Medication Adherence Enhancing Interventions: An ISPOR Special Interest Group Report.

OBJECTIVES: The lack of universal guidance on outcome measures for evaluating medication adherence enhancing interventions (MAEIs) poses a challenge for assessing their effectiveness. This literature review aimed to provide a systematic overview of outcome measures currently used for the value assessment of MAEIs. METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, and Academic Search Complete for randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials, prospective cohort studies, model-based economic evaluations, and value frameworks published in English between January 2010 and September 2020. Two independent reviewers screened all titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review. Due to the large number of relevant studies, data extraction was limited to articles published between January 2018 and September 2020. We collected data on the general characteristics of the study, the type of intervention, and the outcomes measured. RESULTS: We screened 14 685 records and identified 308 articles for data extraction. Behavioral interventions were the most common (n = 143), followed by educational interventions (n = 110) and mixed-method interventions (n = 73). Outcomes were clustered into 7 categories with medication adherence (n = 286) being the most frequently measured, followed by clinical outcomes (n = 155), health-related quality of life (n = 57), resource use (n = 43), patient satisfaction (n = 31), economic outcomes (n = 18), and other outcomes (n = 76). CONCLUSIONS: Various outcomes measures have been used to evaluate MAEIs, with only a small number of studies exploring economic and patient-reported outcomes. Future research is warranted to develop a consensus-based set of criteria for assessing MAEIs to facilitate the comparison of interventions and enable informed decision making.

A retrospective descriptive study of medical record documentation of how treatment limitations are communicated with family members of patients from culturally diverse backgrounds.

INTRODUCTION: Communication between clinicians and family members of patients about treatment limitation practices is essential to care-planning and decision-making. For patients and family members from culturally diverse backgrounds, there are additional considerations when communicating about treatment limitations. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore how treatment limitations are communicated with family members of patients from culturally diverse backgrounds in intensive care. METHODS: A descriptive study using a retrospective medical record audit was undertaken. Medical record data were collected from patients who died in 2018 in four intensive care units in Melbourne, Australia. Data are presented using descriptive and inferential statistics and progress note entries. RESULTS: From 430 adult deceased patients, 49.3% (n = 212) of patients were born overseas, 56.9% (n = 245) identified with a religion, and 14.9% (n = 64) spoke a language other than English as their preferred language. Professional interpreters were used in 4.9% (n = 21) of family meetings. Documentation about the level of treatment limitation decisions were present in 82.1% (n = 353) of patient records. Nurses were documented as present for treatment limitation discussions for 49.3% (n = 174) of patients. Where nurses were present, nurses supported family members, including reassurance that end-of-life wishes would be respected. There was evidence of nurses coordinating healthcare activities and attempting to address and resolve difficulties experienced by family members. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first known Australian study to explore documented evidence of how treatment limitations are communicated with family members of patients from culturally diverse backgrounds. Many patients have documented treatment limitations, yet there are a proportion of patients who die before treatment limitations can be discussed with family, which may influence the timing and quality of end-of-life care. Where language barriers exist, interpreters should be used to better ensure effective communication between clinicians and family. Greater provision for nurses to engage in treatment limitation discussions is required.

A novel, multidomain, primary care nurse-led and mHealth-assisted intervention for dementia risk reduction in middle-aged adults (HAPPI MIND): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Middle-aged multidomain risk reduction interventions targeting modifiable risk factors for dementia may delay or prevent a third of dementia cases in later life. We describe the protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT), HAPPI MIND (Holistic Approach in Primary care for PreventIng Memory Impairment aNd Dementia). HAPPI MIND will evaluate the efficacy of a multidomain, nurse-led, mHealth supported intervention for assessing dementia risk and reducing associated risk factors in middle-aged adults in the Australian primary care setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: General practice clinics (n≥26) across Victoria and New South Wales, Australia, will be recruited and randomised. Practice nurses will be trained to implement the HAPPI MIND intervention or a brief intervention. Patients of participating practices aged 45-65 years with ≥2 potential dementia risk factors will be identified and recruited (approximately 15 patients/clinic). Brief intervention participants receive a personalised report outlining their risk factors for dementia based on Australian National University Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI) scores, education booklet and referral to their general practitioner as appropriate. HAPPI MIND participants receive the brief intervention as well as six individualised dementia risk reduction sessions with a nurse trained in motivational interviewing and principles of behaviour change, a personalised risk reduction action plan and access to the purpose-built HAPPI MIND smartphone app for risk factor self-management. Follow-up data collection will occur at 12, 24 and 36 months. Primary outcome is ANU-ADRI score change at 12 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes include change in cognition, quality of life and individual risk factors of dementia. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Project approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: 28273). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at healthcare conferences. If effective in reducing dementia risk, the HAPPI MIND intervention could be integrated into primary care, scaled up nationally and sustained over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621001168842.