Time to solve persistent, pernicious and widespread nursing workforce shortages.

AIM: This paper discusses four main strategies for addressing nursing shortages that have been persistent, widespread and growing. Fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic might offer valuable impetus to address this tenacious challenge. BACKGROUND: Nursing shortages are common, widespread and have been persistent for most of a century. Many of the reasons behind these shortages are well known and are themselves enduring, as are the types of strategies put forward for addressing them. These strategies can generally be classified into four main categories: enhancing retention, improving recruitment, encouraging return to practice and drawing on international human resources. The COVID-19 pandemic is the latest major threat to ensuring a sufficiently sized and skilled nursing workforce. Many nurses have succumbed to burnout as well the plethora of factors that predated the pandemic and have a negative impact on nurse wellbeing, turnover and intention to leave. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: This discussion paper draws on international sources of evidence. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: This paper highlights how many of the factors behind and strategies for addressing nursing shortages at the local, national and global levels are widely studied and known. A sustained combination of strategies that focus both within and beyond health and nursing, including on the broader social context, is necessary. While COVID-19 has been extremely damaging, it might present an opportunity to make sustainable, effective reforms to address nursing shortages. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY: Knowledge users must recognise that a combination of approaches across the gamut of policies that influence nursing workforces is necessary to address nursing shortages. Attention must also focus on factors beyond nursing and healthcare if shortages are to be remedied.

Practical guide to undertaking scoping reviews for pharmacy clinicians, researchers and policymakers.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Scoping reviews are a valuable evidence synthesis methodology. They can be used to map the evidence related to any topic to allow examination of practice, methods, policy and where (and how) future research could be undertaken. As such, they are a useful form of evidence synthesis for pharmacy clinicians, researchers and policymakers to review a broad range of evidence sources. COMMENT: This commentary presents the most comprehensive and up to date methodology for scoping reviews published by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). This approach builds upon two older approaches by Arksey and O'Malley, and Levac. To assist reviewers working in the field of pharmacy with planning and conducting scoping reviews, this paper describes how to undertake scoping reviews from inception to publication with specific examples related to pharmacy topics. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The JBI scoping review methodology is a valuable evidence synthesis approach to the field of pharmacy and therapeutics. This approach can assist pharmacy clinicians, researchers and policymakers to gain an understanding of the extant literature, to identify gaps, to explore concepts, characteristics and to examine current practice.

Culturally safe, high-quality breast cancer screening for transgender people: A scoping review protocol.

AIM: To develop evidence-based recommendations for provision of culturally safe, high-quality services for breast cancer screening for transgender people. DESIGN: The scoping review will follow the JBI methodological guidance for scoping reviews. METHODS: A search using MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, the Cochrane Library, including the Cochrane Methodology Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the World Health Organization, Australia Government Department of Health and Google Scholar will be undertaken. The review will include people of any age and ethnicity defined in the source of evidence as transgender. The review will include individuals who have used gender-affirming interventions or not and sources of evidence that report information relevant to the provision of culturally safe, high-quality breast cancer screening services for transgender people. English language sources of evidence published from database inception with information from any country will be eligible for inclusion. Sources will be screened for inclusion by three independent reviewers. Results will be extracted using a purpose-built tool and presented in relation to the review questions and objective in the final report using tables, figures and corresponding narrative. Project funding was approved by the Australian Government Department of Health in June 2020. DISCUSSION: There are a range of factors that impact on the equity of health access and outcomes for people who are not cisgender. Transgender people are at risk of breast cancer but there is relatively little evidence about how their risks may or may not differ substantially from cis-gendered individuals and little guidance for health providers to ensure inclusive, culturally safe, high-quality breast cancer screening services for both transgender males, transgender females and gender diverse people who may not identify as male or as female. IMPACT: It is important to provide culturally safe, high-quality services for breast cancer screening for transgender people.

Putting People First: The Importance of Recommending Minimum Staffing Levels and Skills Mix.

Australia's Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety has concluded. The Commission's final report described a sector failing to deliver care that older Australians deserve despite the best efforts of many staff. Throughout the Commission, staffing was a frequent concern, with the size and composition of the direct care workforce a prominent focus. Throughout the Commission, many stakeholders campaigned for mandated staffing levels in skills mix in nursing homes and the Commission's report and Commonwealth Government response included recommendations for these. While this is a necessary step toward wider reform, the Royal Commission's recommendation and the Australian Government's response must support the delivery of best practice care more strongly. This column argues that the minimum standard for nursing home staff care time must be higher, and that higher minimum staffing levels and more clearly defined skills mix are critical to the delivery of safe, respectful, dignified person-centred care.

Undertaking a scoping review: A practical guide for nursing and midwifery students, clinicians, researchers, and academics.

AIM: The aim of this study is to discuss the available methodological resources and best-practice guidelines for the development and completion of scoping reviews relevant to nursing and midwifery policy, practice, and research. DESIGN: Discussion Paper. DATA SOURCES: Scoping reviews that exemplify best practice are explored with reference to the recently updated JBI scoping review guide (2020) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Scoping Review extension (PRISMA-ScR). IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING AND MIDWIFERY: Scoping reviews are an increasingly common form of evidence synthesis. They are used to address broad research questions and to map evidence from a variety of sources. Scoping reviews are a useful form of evidence synthesis for those in nursing and midwifery and present opportunities for researchers to review a broad array of evidence and resources. However, scoping reviews still need to be conducted with rigour and transparency. CONCLUSION: This study provides guidance and advice for researchers and clinicians who are preparing to undertake an evidence synthesis and are considering a scoping review methodology in the field of nursing and midwifery. IMPACT: With the increasing popularity of scoping reviews, criticism of the rigour, transparency, and appropriateness of the methodology have been raised across multiple academic and clinical disciplines, including nursing and midwifery. This discussion paper provides a unique contribution by discussing each component of a scoping review, including: developing research questions and objectives; protocol development; developing eligibility criteria and the planned search approach; searching and selecting the evidence; extracting and analysing evidence; presenting results; and summarizing the evidence specifically for the fields of nursing and midwifery. Considerations for when to select this methodology and how to prepare a review for publication are also discussed. This approach is applied to the disciplines of nursing and midwifery to assist nursing and/or midwifery students, clinicians, researchers, and academics.

Recency of Practice and the Maintenance of Professional Competence for Nurses and Midwives: A Scoping Review Protocol.

Australian and international nursing regulators have specific requirements for continuing competence and the professional, safe practice of nurses and midwives. Requirements can dictate duration of practice, time away from/recency of practice, revalidation policies, and time between study program completion and practice commencement. Requirements vary between contexts and are periodically updated. To identify and examine Australian and international evidence for best regulatory practices relating to recency and the maintenance of professional competence among nurses and midwives, a scoping review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews will be undertaken. This protocol details the scope, inclusion criteria, and methodology that will guide the scoping review, which will inform an update to the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia's Registration Standard: Recency of Practice.

PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation.

Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.

Experiences and unmet needs of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people with cancer care: A systematic review and meta-synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the cancer care experiences and unmet needs of people who identify as a sexual or gender minority. METHODS: A qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis was undertaken based on a registered protocol. Following literature searching and study selection, study quality was examined by using the Critical Appraisal Skill Programme Checklist. Qualitative data were extracted verbatim from included studies and synthesized by using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifteen studies that included lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people living with or beyond cancer were included in the review. Studies including gender minorities were not identified. Most of the study participants were sexual minority women with breast cancer or sexual minority men with prostate cancer. Meta-synthesis of 106 individual findings generated 6 overarching themes pertaining to sexual orientation disclosure, experiences and fear of homophobia, positive and negative health-care professional behaviors, heterocentric systems and care, inadequacy of available support groups, and unmet needs for patient-centered care and LGB-specific information. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual people often reported feelings of anxiety, invisibility, isolation, and frustration throughout the cancer care continuum. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the experiences of LGB people with cancer care shows that LGB people face numerous challenges due to their sexual orientation and receive care that does not adequately address their needs. Training and education of health-care professionals are strongly recommended to address some of these challenges and practice gaps. Culturally appropriate care includes avoiding heterosexual assumptions, use of inclusive language, the provision of tailored information, and involving partners in care.

Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach.

BACKGROUND: Scoping reviews are a relatively new approach to evidence synthesis and currently there exists little guidance regarding the decision to choose between a systematic review or scoping review approach when synthesising evidence. The purpose of this article is to clearly describe the differences in indications between scoping reviews and systematic reviews and to provide guidance for when a scoping review is (and is not) appropriate. RESULTS: Researchers may conduct scoping reviews instead of systematic reviews where the purpose of the review is to identify knowledge gaps, scope a body of literature, clarify concepts or to investigate research conduct. While useful in their own right, scoping reviews may also be helpful precursors to systematic reviews and can be used to confirm the relevance of inclusion criteria and potential questions. CONCLUSIONS: Scoping reviews are a useful tool in the ever increasing arsenal of evidence synthesis approaches. Although conducted for different purposes compared to systematic reviews, scoping reviews still require rigorous and transparent methods in their conduct to ensure that the results are trustworthy. Our hope is that with clear guidance available regarding whether to conduct a scoping review or a systematic review, there will be less scoping reviews being performed for inappropriate indications better served by a systematic review, and vice-versa.

An International Educational Training Course for Conducting Systematic Reviews in Health Care: The Joanna Briggs Institute's Comprehensive Systematic Review Training Program.

BACKGROUND: The cornerstone of evidence-based health care is the systematic review of international evidence. Systematic reviews follow a rigorous, standardized approach in their conduct and reporting, and as such, education and training are essential prior to commencement. AIMS: This study reports on the evolution of the Joanna Briggs Institute Comprehensive Systematic Review Training Program (JBICSRTP) as an exemplar approach for teaching systematic review methods. RESULTS: The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) is an international research and development center at the University of Adelaide, South Australia. Its mission is to promote and facilitate evidence-based best practice globally, largely through the provision of education and training. JBI was one of the first to consider all forms of evidence in systematic reviews, and as such, implementation of standardized training was essential. Since 1999, JBI has offered a systematic review training program. The JBICSRTP is now delivered face to face over 5 days, with an optional online component; the content aligns to that proposed in the Sicily statement. Over the last 3 years, JBI and its Collaboration have trained over 3,300 people from over 30 countries. A "train-the-trainer" (TtT) style program was established to cope with demand, and to date, hundreds of trainers have been licensed across the globe to deliver the JBICSRTP. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Providing standardized training materials, ensuring open and ongoing communication, and adopting a TtT style program while still allowing for local adaptability are strategies that have led to the establishment of a highly skilled global training network and ensured the success and longevity of the JBICSRTP.

Effectiveness of public health messaging and communication channels during smoke events: A rapid systematic review.

Exposure to smoke emitted from wildfire and planned burns (i.e., smoke events) has been associated with numerous negative health outcomes, including respiratory symptoms and conditions. This rapid review investigates recent evidence (post-2009) regarding the effectiveness of public health messaging during smoke events. The objectives were to determine the effectiveness of various communication channels used and public health messages disseminated during smoke events, for general and at-risk populations. A search of 12 databases and grey literature yielded 1775 unique articles, of which 10 were included in this review. Principal results were: 1) Smoke-related public health messages are communicated via a variety of channels, but limited evidence is available regarding their effectiveness for the general public or at-risk groups. 2) Messages that use simple language are more commonly recalled, understood, and complied with. Compliance differs according to socio-demographic characteristics. 3) At-risk groups may be advised to stay indoors before the general population, in order to protect the most vulnerable people in a community. The research included in this review was observational and predominantly descriptive, and is therefore unable to sufficiently answer questions regarding effectiveness. Experimental research, as well as evaluations, are required to examine the effectiveness of modern communication channels, channels to reach at-risk groups, and the 'stay indoors' message.

Managing and Coding References for Systematic Reviews and Scoping Reviews in EndNote.

This article describes a novel approach for using EndNote to manage and code references in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and scoping reviews. The process is simple and easy for reviewers new to both EndNote and systematic reviews. This process allows reviewers to easily conduct and report systematic reviews in line with the internationally recognized PRISMA reporting guidelines and also facilitates the overall task of systematic or scoping review conduct and reporting from the initial search through to structuring the results, discussion, and conclusions in a rigorous, reproducible, and user-friendly manner.

Provision of Meaningful Care at Diagnosis, Birth, and after Stillbirth: A Qualitative Synthesis of Parents' Experiences.

BACKGROUND: The care provided to parents experiencing stillbirth can have significant and lasting impacts on their immediate and long-term psychological well being. The aim of this qualitative synthesis was to investigate parents' experiences of care received during and after stillbirth. METHODS: Qualitative findings extracted from 20 included studies were pooled using a meta-aggregative approach. RESULTS: Four meta-syntheses encompassing parents' experiences of care at diagnosis of stillbirth, induction and birth, immediately postbirth and onwards, revealed care strategies that parents appreciated and found helpful, and also actions and behaviors that were distressing. Helpful strategies included a warm and sensitive communication style, provision of clear and understandable information, shared decision making, and respect for individual needs and preferences. Parents appreciated guidance from health care professionals about seeing and holding, including being prepared for their baby's possible appearance, information on how to spend time with their baby, and collection of memorabilia. After stillbirth, offers of follow-up care, including referrals for professional support, were appreciated. CONCLUSIONS: Care received during and after stillbirth may have lasting impacts on parents' future well being. Health care professionals may aid in improving parents' well being after stillbirth by providing care that is cognizant of parents' emotional states. Care strategies arising from the findings of this review are suggested.

Effectiveness, cost effectiveness, acceptability and implementation barriers/enablers of chronic kidney disease management programs for Indigenous people in Australia, New Zealand and Canada: a systematic review of mixed evidence.

BACKGROUND: Indigenous peoples in Australia, New Zealand and Canada carry a greater burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) than the general populations in each country, and this burden is predicted to increase. Given the human and economic cost of dialysis, understanding how to better manage CKD at earlier stages of disease progression is an important priority for practitioners and policy-makers. A systematic review of mixed evidence was undertaken to examine the evidence relating to the effectivness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of chronic kidney disease management programs designed for Indigenous people, as well as barriers and enablers of implementation of such programs. METHODS: Published and unpublished studies reporting quantitative and qualitative data on health sector-led management programs and models of care explicitly designed to manage, slow progression or otherwise improve the lives of Indigenous people with CKD published between 2000 and 2014 were considered for inclusion. Data on clinical effectiveness, ability to self-manage, quality of life, acceptability, cost and cost-benefit, barriers and enablers of implementation were of interest. Quantitative data was summarized in narrative and tabular form and qualitative data was synthesized using the Joanna Briggs Institute meta-aggregation approach. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. Six studies provided evidence of clinical effectiveness of CKD programs designed for Indigenous people, two provided evidence of cost and cost-effectiveness of a CKD program, and two provided qualitative evidence of barriers and enablers of implementation of effective and/or acceptable CKD management programs. Common features of effective and acceptable programs were integration within existing services, nurse-led care, intensive follow-up, provision of culturally-appropriate education, governance structures supporting community ownership, robust clinical systems supporting communication and a central role for Indigenous Health Workers. CONCLUSIONS: Given the human cost of dialysis and the growing population of people living with CKD, there is an urgent need to draw lessons from the available evidence from this and other sources, including studies in the broader population, to better serve this population with programs that address the barriers to receiving high-quality care and improve quality of life.

An Evidence-Based Approach to Scoping Reviews.

OBJECTIVE: Scoping reviews are used to assess the extent of a body of literature on a particular topic, and often to ensure that further research in that area is a beneficial addition to world knowledge. The aim of this paper reports upon the development of a methodology for scoping reviews based upon the Arksey and O'Malley framework, the Levac, Colquhoun, and O'Brien, and the Joanna Briggs Institute methods of evidence synthesis. METHODS: A working group consisting of members of the Joanna Briggs collaborating organizations met to discuss the proposed framework for the methodology and develop a draft for the scoping review methodology based on the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the work of Levac et al. This was followed by a workshop attended by other members of the organizations consisting of 30 international researchers to discuss the proposed methodology. Further refinement of the methodology was undertaken as a result of the feedback received from the workshop. RESULTS: The development of the methodology focused on five stages of the protocol and review development. These were identifying the research question by clarifying and linking the purpose and research question, identifying the relevant studies using a three-step literature search in order to balance feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness, careful selection of the studies to using a team approach, charting the data and collating the results to identify the implications of the study findings for policy, practice, or research. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: The current methodology recommends including both quantitative and qualitative research, as well as evidence from economic and expert opinion sources to answer questions of effectiveness, appropriateness, meaningfulness and feasibility of health practices and delivery methods. The proposed framework has the potential to provide options when faced with complex concepts or broad research questions.

Enablers and barriers to nurse practitioners working in Australian aged care: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify evidence reporting on nurse practitioners working in aged care in Australia and to categorise the reported factors found to be barriers or facilitators to operation in terms of establishment, sustainability, and expansion. INTRODUCTION: Nurse practitioners work in a variety of aged care contexts throughout Australia but are underutilised and uncommon. Despite evidence for their effectiveness, it is unclear what barriers or enabling factors contribute to the successful and sustainable implementation of nurse practitioners working in this sector. METHODS: Based on an a-priori protocol the JBI methodology for scoping reviews was used and the review reported against the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Databases searched included MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Web of Science, and Scopus. Peer reviewed and grey literature describing the role of Australian nurse practitioners in aged care were included. RESULTS: Of 2968 retrieved sources, 18 were included representing studies of a variety of designs from all Australian states and territories. Residential care and in-home care contexts as well as metropolitan, regional, and remote locations were represented. Overall, 123 individual barriers and facilitators were identified across seven inductively derived categories: staff/individual, organisational, system, operational, resource, data, and consumers/clients/residents. In many cases, factors appeared across both positive (facilitators) and negative (barriers) categories. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse practitioners can improve the quality of care being provided to older people accessing aged care in Australia. When establishing or maintaining nurse practitioner roles in aged care knowledge users should have a comprehensive understanding of the range of factors potentially contributing to or limiting success or sustainability. As implementation is highly contextual, various types of organisational and sectoral factors as well as individual and overarching factors related to the regulation of nurse practitioners practice should be considered.

Extent, range, and nature of studies examining sleep in nurses: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to comprehensively map the extent, range, and nature of studies that examine the various dimensions of nurses' sleep across all health care settings or countries. INTRODUCTION: Over the past 2 decades, the importance of sleep for nurses has gained increasing attention from health care administrators, researchers, and policymakers. Despite growing research in the area, it remains unclear as to how research on sleep in nurses aligns with emerging concepts in sleep medicine more broadly, particularly in terms of how outcomes and predictors are associated with different dimensions of sleep. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will include primary studies that examine nurses' sleep. All dimensions of sleep (eg, duration, timing, variability, quality, and common disorders) and all nurses, irrespective of career stage, will be considered for inclusion. METHODS: This review will utilize the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRIMSA-ScR). Databases to be searched include MEDLINE (Ovid), Emcare, Embase, PsycINFO, and Scopus. A 3-step search strategy will be undertaken to identify primary studies published in English with no date limit. The data extracted will include specific details about the nursing population, sleep dimension, outcome measures, methodology, and key findings. Figurative, tabular, and accompanying narrative synthesis will be used to present the results in line with the review questions. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/rzc4m.