The history of disaster nursing: from Nightingale to nursing in the 21st century.

Background: Nurses have a rich history in performing their duty both domestically and internationally in response to a disaster. Comprising the largest proportion of the healthcare workforce, nurses possess a unique opportunity to inform disaster planning and management. With the ongoing threat from COVID-19 and continuing conflict, humanitarian aid needs, epidemics and natural disasters; the capacity of nurses to continue to respond in times of global need is unparalleled. Aims: The aim of this paper is to explore the developments in the field of disaster nursing. Mapping key changes in policy, practice and outcomes. Methods: A qualitative interpretive historical review was conducted to examine core developments in the history of disaster nursing, examining key organisations (e.g. World Health Organization, International Council of Nurses), national and international policies and historical accounts. Results: 29 articles were analysed, and politics, strategic perspectives and nursing identity ('sense of duty' and roles) emerged from the literature. The influence of professionalisation and public health/health promotion emerged next. A total of 10 articles refer to disaster nursing specifically, of which 4 of these are reports/policy. Conclusions: Nurses have spent centuries building the trust and legitimacy of the profession. Disaster nursing goes beyond the expectations of a registered nurse. The responsibilities of a disaster nurse encompass wider community health promotion, critical decision-making beyond the individual patient, resilience and ethical challenges. Whilst significant advancements have emerged in the last 30 years, further research, and representation of the profession at a strategic and political level could enhance the effectiveness of nurses' roles in the 4 phases of disaster response: mitigation, preparation, response and recovery.

The changing role of Advanced Clinical Practitioners working with older people during the COVID- 19 pandemic: A qualitative research study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 was identified as a pandemic by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in December 2020. Advanced Clinical Practitioners (ACPs) in England working with older people with frailty, experienced their clinical role changing in response to the emergency health needs of this complex population group. In contrast to other countries, in England Advanced Clinical Practitioners are drawn from both nursing and allied health professions. Whilst much of the literature emphasises the importance of ensuring the sustainability of the Advanced Clinical Practitioners' role, the pandemic threw further light on its potential and challenges. However, an initial review of the literature highlighted a lack of research of Advanced Clinical Practitioners' capabilities working with uncertainty in disaster response situations. AIM: To capture the lived experience of how English Advanced Clinical Practitioners working with older people adapted their roles in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (October 2020-January 2021). DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A qualitative research design was used. Following ethical approval, 23 Advanced Clinical Practitioner volunteer participants from across England with varied health professional backgrounds were recruited from Advanced Clinical Practitioners' professional and social media networks on Twitter using a snowballing technique. METHODS: Depending on preference or availability, 23 participants (nurses (18), physiotherapists (2), paramedics (2) and a pharmacist (1)) were interviewed singularly (n = 9) or as part of 3 focus groups (n = 14) using Zoom video communication. Audio recordings were transcribed and using qualitative data analysis software, NVivo 12 pro, coded for an essentialist thematic analysis of Advanced Clinical Practitioners' responses using an inductive approach. 27 codes were identified and collated into five themes. For the purposes of this paper, four themes are discussed: experiencing different work, developing attributes, negotiating barriers and changing future provision. FINDINGS: Advanced Clinical Practitioners successfully transferred their advanced practice skills into areas of clinical need during the pandemic. Their autonomous and generic, high level of expertise equipped them for management and leadership positions where speed of change, and the dissolution of traditional professional boundaries, were prioritised. Barriers to progress included a lack of knowledge of the Advanced Clinical Practitioner role and friction between Advanced Clinical Practitioners and physicians. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated the successful adaption of the Advanced Clinical Practitioner role to enable more creative, personalised and sustainable solutions in the care of older people living with frailty during the pandemic. The potential of Advanced Clinical Practitioner development is in a juxtaposition to the threat of pandemic services being dismantled once the emergency nature of care has passed. Healthcare organisations have a vital part to play in considering the enablers and barriers of Advanced Clinical Practitioner capability-based practice when responding to uncertainty.