Prevalence of frailty and pain in hospitalised cancer patients: implications for older adult care.

A hospital-wide point prevalence study investigated frailty and pain in patients with a cancer-related admission. Modifiable factors associated with frailty in people with cancer were determined through logistic regression. Forty-eight patients (19%) with cancer-related admissions were 2.65 times more likely to be frail and 2.12 more likely to have moderate pain. Frailty and pain were highly prevalent among cancer-related admissions, reinforcing the need for frailty screening and importance of pain assessment for patients with cancer.

Frailty and pain in an acute private hospital: an observational point prevalence study.

Frailty and pain in hospitalised patients are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. However, there is limited data on the associations between frailty and pain in this group of patients. Understanding the prevalence, distribution and interaction of frailty and pain in hospitals will help to determine the magnitude of this association and assist health care professionals to target interventions and develop resources to improve patient outcomes. This study reports the point prevalence concurrence of frailty and pain in adult patients in an acute hospital. A point prevalence, observational study of frailty and pain was conducted. All adult inpatients (excluding high dependency units) at an acute, private, 860-bed metropolitan hospital were eligible to participate. Frailty was assessed using the self-report modified Reported Edmonton Frail Scale. Current pain and worst pain in the last 24 h were self-reported using the standard 0-10 numeric rating scale. Pain scores were categorised by severity (none, mild, moderate, severe). Demographic and clinical information including admitting services (medical, mental health, rehabilitation, surgical) were collected. The STROBE checklist was followed. Data were collected from 251 participants (54.9% of eligible). The prevalence of frailty was 26.7%, prevalence of current pain was 68.1% and prevalence of pain in the last 24 h was 81.3%. After adjusting for age, sex, admitting service and pain severity, admitting services medical (AOR: 13.5 95% CI 5.7-32.8), mental health (AOR: 6.3, 95% CI 1. 9-20.9) and rehabilitation (AOR: 8.1, 95% CI 2.4-37.1) and moderate pain (AOR: 3.9, 95% CI 1. 6-9.8) were associated with increased frailty. The number of older patients identified in this study who were frail has implications for managing this group in a hospital setting. This indicates a need to focus on developing strategies including frailty assessment on admission, and the development of interventions to meet the care needs of these patients. The findings also highlight the need for increased pain assessment, particularly in those who are frail, for more effective pain management.Trial registration: The study was prospectively registered (ACTRN12620000904976; 14th September 2020).

Nurses' perceptions of using volunteer support in health care settings: A systematic scoping review.

AIMS: To understand nurses' perceptions of volunteer support in health care settings. BACKGROUND: Increasingly, volunteers provide specialised support to health care service users, requiring volunteers and nurses to work closely together. However, little is known about nurses' perceptions of volunteer support. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following the PRISMA-ScR checklist. A mixed-methods convergent integrative approach was taken guided by the JBI framework. Quantitative data were transformed into qualitative data for synthesis and descriptive thematic analysis. Six databases were searched (CINHAL+, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, PsycInfo, ProQuest Health and Medical Collection) on 24 January 2022 using terms related to nurses, perceptions, volunteers and care settings, followed by a manual search. The search was limited to English language articles published during 2000-2022. Studies were included if they reported nurses' perceptions of volunteers supporting care within any health care setting. RESULTS: Of the 943 records identified, 12 met the inclusion criteria. All 12 were included in the review following critical appraisal. Five themes were identified: perceived benefits for patients, volunteers providing support for nursing staff, nurses' valuing volunteer support, nurses' understanding of the volunteer role and nurses' understanding of recruitment and training of volunteers. CONCLUSION: Nurses generally viewed volunteer support positively and perceived that it benefitted patients and assisted nurses. Some nurses raised concerns about the burden of additional supervision of volunteers and lacked knowledge of the volunteer role, recruitment and training. Emerging innovative models of nurse-led volunteer support can maximise the contribution of volunteers and help overcome barriers to volunteer acceptance. IMPLICATIONS: These findings will inform volunteer policies and provide guidance in developing volunteer support programs.

Effectiveness of nurse-led volunteer support and technology-driven pain assessment in improving the outcomes of hospitalised older adults: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Hospitalised older adults are prone to functional deterioration, which is more evident in frail older patients and can be further exacerbated by pain. Two interventions that have the potential to prevent progression of frailty and improve patient outcomes in hospitalised older adults but have yet to be subject to clinical trials are nurse-led volunteer support and technology-driven assessment of pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This single-centre, prospective, non-blinded, cluster randomised controlled trial will compare the efficacy of nurse-led volunteer support, technology-driven pain assessment and the combination of the two interventions to usual care for hospitalised older adults. Prior to commencing recruitment, the intervention and control conditions will be randomised across four wards. Recruitment will continue for 12 months. Data will be collected on admission, at discharge and at 30 days post discharge, with additional data collected during hospitalisation comprising records of pain assessment and volunteer support activity. The primary outcome of this study will be the change in frailty between both admission and discharge, and admission and 30 days, and secondary outcomes include length of stay, adverse events, discharge destination, quality of life, depression, cognitive function, functional independence, pain scores, pain management intervention (type and frequency) and unplanned 30-day readmissions. Stakeholder evaluation and an economic analysis of the interventions will also be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by Human Research Ethics Committees at Ramsay Health Care WA|SA (number: 2057) and Edith Cowan University (number: 2021-02210-SAUNDERS). The findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications and social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001173987.

Prevalence of frailty and pain in hospitalised adult patients in an acute hospital: a protocol for a point prevalence observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty and pain are associated with adverse patient clinical outcomes and healthcare system costs. Frailty and pain can interact, such that symptoms of frailty can make pain assessment difficult and pain can exacerbate the progression of frailty. The prevalence of frailty and pain and their concurrence in hospital settings are not well understood, and patients with cognitive impairment are often excluded from pain prevalence studies due to difficulties assessing their pain. The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of frailty and pain in adult inpatients, including those with cognitive impairment, in an acute care private metropolitan hospital in Western Australia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective, observational, single-day point prevalence, cross-sectional study of frailty and pain intensity of all inpatients (excluding day surgery and critical care units) will be undertaken. Frailty will be assessed using the modified Reported Edmonton Frail Scale. Current pain intensity will be assessed using the PainChek smart-device application enabling pain assessment in people unable to report pain due to cognitive impairment. Participants will also provide a numerical rating of the intensity of current pain and the worst pain experienced in the previous 24 hours. Demographic and clinical information will be collected from patient files. The overall response rate of the survey will be reported, as well as the percentage prevalence of frailty and of pain in the sample (separately for PainChek scores and numerical ratings). Additional statistical modelling will be conducted comparing frailty scores with pain scores, adjusting for covariates including age, gender, ward type and reason for admission. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by Ramsay Health Care Human Research Ethics Committee WA/SA (reference: 2038) and Edith Cowan University Human Research Ethics Committee (reference: 2020-02008-SAUNDERS). Findings will be widely disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications and social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000904976.

Evaluating trauma nursing education: An integrative literature review.

OBJECTIVE: A review of the current literature evaluating trauma nursing education. BACKGROUND: A variety of trauma nursing courses exist, to educate nurses working in trauma settings, and to maintain their continuing professional development. Despite an increase in the number of courses delivered, there appears to be a lack of evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of trauma nursing education and in particular the justification for this resource allocation. DESIGN: Integrative literature review. DATA SOURCES: A search of international literature on trauma nursing education evaluation published in English from 1985 to 2015 was conducted through electronic databases CINAHL Plus, Google Scholar, PubMed, Austhealth, Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science), Sciverse Science Direct (Elsevier) & One file (Gale). Only peer reviewed journal articles identifying trauma course and trauma nursing course evaluation have been included in the selection criteria. REVIEW METHODS: An integrative review of both quantitative and qualitative literature guided by Whittemore and Knafl's theoretical framework using Bowling's and Pearson's validated appraisal checklists, has been conducted for three months. RESULTS: Only 17 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 14 on trauma course evaluation and 3 on trauma nursing course evaluation. Study findings are presented as two main themes: the historical evolution of trauma nursing education and evaluation of trauma nursing education outcomes. CONCLUSION: Trauma nursing remains in its infancy and education in this specialty is mainly led by continuing professional development courses. The shortage of evaluation studies on trauma nursing courses reflects the similar status in continuing professional development course evaluation. A trauma nursing course evaluation study will address the gap in this under researched area.