Research on missed nursing care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Missed nursing care is defined as care that is delayed, partially completed, or not completed at all. The scenario created by the COVID-19 pandemic may have influenced multifactorial determinants related to the care environment, nursing processes, internal processes, and decision-making processes, increasing missed nursing care. AIM: This scoping review aimed to establish the quantity and type of research undertaken on missed nursing care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus, two national and regional databases, two dissertations and theses databases, a gray literature database, two study registers, and a search engine from November 1, 2019, to March 23, 2023. We included quantitative, qualitative, and mixed studies carried out in all healthcare settings that examined missed nursing care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Language restrictions were not applied. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection and data extraction. Disagreements between the reviewers were resolved through discussion or with an additional reviewer. RESULTS: We included 25 studies with different designs, the most common being acute care cross-sectional survey designs. Studies focused on determining the frequency and reasons for missed nursing care and its influence on nurses and organizational outcomes. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Missed nursing care studies during the COVID-19 pandemic were essentially nurses-based prevalence surveys. There is an urgent need to advance the design and development of longitudinal and intervention studies, as well as to broaden the focus of research beyond acute care. Further research is needed to determine the impact of missed nursing care on nursing-sensitive outcomes and from the patient's perspective.

The Tilburg Frailty Indicator: A psychometric systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is one of the most prominent multidimensional frailty assessment instruments. This review aimed to critically appraise and summarise its measurement properties. METHODS: Reports were eligible if they included results of studies aimed at developing the TFI or evaluating its measurement properties. We performed a literature search in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases from their inception until December 8, 2021. We also searched grey literature databases. We assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the "COSMIN Risk of Bias". The measurement properties were evaluated using specific criteria. We graded the quality of the evidence using a GRADE approach. RESULTS: Sixty-three studies were included. We found moderate sufficient evidence for TFI content validity, although it is still insufficient for the comprehensiveness of its items. TFI construct validity was based on sufficient evidence from two studies of its structural validity as well as multiple hypothesis-testing for construct validity studies with inconsistent results. We did not find any studies that assessed cross-cultural validity. Only one of TFI's three dimensions showed sufficient evidence for the internal consistency of its scores, and results in test-retest reliability were inconsistent. The TFI showed high sufficient concurrent validity with the comprehensive geriatric assessment. We identified several studies assessing its predictive validity for adverse frailty-related outcomes, although most of the evidence from these studies was insufficient. We did not find any studies that assessed the responsiveness of TFI scores. CONCLUSIONS: The TFI had evidence gaps in several relevant measurement properties. Further research is needed to strengthen its usefulness as a clinical decision-making tool.

Multidimensional instruments with an integral approach to identify frailty in community-dwelling people: protocol for a systematic psychometric review.

INTRODUCTION: An increasing number of investigations highlight the complex nature of frailty; therefore, the use of multidimensional assessment instruments could be useful in clinical decision-making. Frail people are found mainly in the community setting which is why this is the ideal environment for early screening and intervention. For this purpose, it is necessary to have valid, time-effective and easy-to-use frailty assessment instruments. The aim of this review is to critically appraise, compare and summarise the quality of the measurement properties of all multidimensional instruments with an integral approach to identify frailty in community-dwelling people. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Medline, Psychological Information Database (PsycINFO) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) will be searched from their inception dates. We will also conduct searches in databases of grey literature. No limits will be applied for language. A highly sensitive validated search filter will be used for finding studies on measurement properties. An additional search including the names of the instruments found in the initial search will also be undertaken. Studies aiming at the development of a measurement instrument, the evaluation of one or more measurement properties or the evaluation of its interpretability will be included. The instrument should have an integral approach (physical, psychological and social) and it should measure all three domains. The context of use should be a community setting. Two reviewers independently will screen the references and assess the risk of bias by consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments checklist. To assess the overall evidence for the measurement properties of the identified instruments, the results of the different studies, adjusted for their methodological quality, will be combined. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval and patient consent are not required as this is a psychometric review based on published studies. The results of this review will be disseminated at conferences and published in an international peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019120212.

Understanding knee osteoarthritis from the patients' perspective: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: No studies of Health Coach Interventions for knee OA sufferers that include patients' perspectives have been published. The study assesses current clinical practice and primary care professionals' advice from the patients' perspective, in order to obtain a participative design for a complex intervention based on coaching psychology. Moreover, wants to analyse the experiences, perceptions, cognitive evaluation, values, emotions, beliefs and coping strategies of patients with knee osteoarthritis, and secondly the impact of these factors in the Self-management of this condition. METHODS: It is an interpretative qualitative study. The study included patients with diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis (OA) from 4 primary health care centres in Barcelona. A theoretical sampling based on a prior definition of participants' characteristics was carried out. Ten semi-structured interviews with knee OA patients were carried out. A content thematic analysis was performed following a mixed-strategy text codification in Lazarus framework and in emerging codes from the data. RESULTS: The results are structured in two blocks: Experiences and perceptions of informants and Experiences of knee osteoarthritis according to the Lazarus model. Regarding experiences and perceptions of informants: Some participants reported that the information was mostly provided by health professionals. Informants know which food they should eat to lose weight and the benefits of weight loss. Moreover, participants explained that they like walking but that sometimes it is difficult to put into practice. Regarding experiences of knee osteoarthritis according Lazarus model: Cognitive evaluation is influenced by cognitive distortions such as obligation, guilt, dramatization and catastrophism. VALUES: Family is the value most associated with wellbeing. Helping others is another recurring value. Emotions: Most participants explain that they feel anxiety, irritability or sadness. Beliefs: To some, physiotherapy helps them feel less pain. However, others explain that it is of no use to them. Participants are aware of the association overweight- pain. Coping strategies: The strategies for coping with emotions aim to reduce psychological distress (anxiety, sadness, anger) and some are more active than others. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights that patients with knee osteoarthritis require a person-centered approach that provides them with strategies to overcome the psychological distress caused by this condition.

Safety of the reuse of needles for subcutaneous insulin injection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Many people with diabetes often reuse disposable needles for subcutaneous insulin injection. We aimed to identify, critically appraise and summarize the available evidence about the safety of this practice. DESIGN: Systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINALH (via EBSCO), SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Open Grey were searched from their inception to December 2015, with no language restrictions. REVIEW METHODS: Epidemiologic and experimental studies assessing adverse effects of reusing needles in people of any age or sex, with or without diabetes, were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of included studies using a multi-design tool. RESULTS: In total, 25 studies were included. All studies had a high risk of bias and data from only nine studies could be pooled. Five studies showed no association between infection at site of injection and reuse of needles (risk difference=-0.00; 95% confidence interval=-0.12-0.11; P=0.99); heterogeneity between these studies was substantial (I(2)=66%; P=0.02). Five cross-sectional studies showed an association between lipohypertrophy and needle reuse (risk difference=0.16, 95% confidence interval=0.05-0.28, P=0.006); there was strong evidence of heterogeneity between these studies (I(2)=87%; P<0.001). Pooled data of two studies with no evidence of heterogeneity between them showed more perceived pain among reusers (risk difference=0.24; 95% confidence interval=0.06-0.43; P=0.006). Reusing a pen needle or disposable syringe-needle was not associated with worse glycaemic control. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no clear scientific evidence to suggest for or against the reuse of needles for subcutaneous insulin injection. This practice is very common among people with diabetes; consequently, further research is necessary to establish its safety.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a health coaching intervention to improve the lifestyle of patients with knee osteoarthritis: cluster randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of osteoarthritis and knee osteoarthritis in the Spanish population is estimated at 17% and 10.2%, respectively. The clinical guidelines concur that the first line treatment for knee osteoarthritis should be non-pharmacological and include weight loss, physical activity and self-management of pain. Health Coaching has been defined as an intervention that facilitates the achievement of health improvement goals, the reduction of unhealthy lifestyles, the improvement of self-management for chronic conditions and quality of life enhancement. The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a health coaching intervention on quality of life, pain, overweight and physical activity in patients from 18 primary care centres of Barcelona with knee osteoarthritis. METHODS/DESIGN: Methodology from the Medical Research Council on developing complex interventions. Phase 1: Intervention modelling and operationalization through a qualitative, socioconstructivist study using theoretical sampling with 10 in-depth interviews to patients with knee osteoarthritis and 4 discussion groups of 8-12 primary care professionals, evaluated using a sociological discourse analysis. Phase 2: Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility study with a community-based randomized clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: 360 patients with knee osteoarthritis (180 in each group). Randomization unit: Primary Care Centre. Intervention Group: will receive standard care plus 20-hour health coaching and follow-up sessions. CONTROL GROUP: will receive standard care. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE: quality of life as measured by the WOMAC index. Data Analyses: will include standardized response mean and multilevel analysis of repeated measures. Economic analysis: based on cost-effectiveness and cost-utility measures. Phase 3: Evaluation of the intervention programme with a qualitative study. Methodology as in Phase 1. DISCUSSION: If the analyses show the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the intervention the results can be incorporated into the clinical guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN57405925. Registred 20 June 2014.