Comparison of the systematic Inflammatory response syndrome and the quick sequential organ failure assessment for prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Awareness and prompt recognition of sepsis are essential for nurses working in the emergency department (ED), enabling them to make an initial assessment of patients and then to sort them according to their condition s severity. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department by comparing the previous sepsis-2 screening tool, the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) and the current sepsis-3 screening tool, the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA). METHODS: This systematic review used the guideline by Bettany-Saltikov and McSherry and was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO. A systematic search was conducted using the CINAHL, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases. Study selection and risk of bias was performed independently by pair of authors. RESULTS: Five articles were included. Overall, SIRS showed higher sensitivity than qSOFA, while qSOFA showed higher specificity than SIRS. The positive predictive value for qSOFA was superior, while there was a minor deviation in negative predictive value between qSOFA and SIRS. CONCLUSION: The overall recommendation based on the included studies indicates that qSOFA is the better-suited screening tool for prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department.

Technology-Supported Guidance Models Stimulating the Development of Critical Thinking in Clinical Practice: Mixed Methods Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Nursing education has increasingly focused on critical thinking among nursing students, as critical thinking is a desired outcome of nursing education. Particular attention is given to the potential of technological tools in guiding nursing students to stimulate the development of critical thinking; however, the general landscape, facilitators, and challenges of these guidance models remain unexplored, and no previous mixed methods systematic review on the subject has been identified. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to synthesize existing evidence on technology-supported guidance models used in nursing education to stimulate the development of critical thinking in nursing students in clinical practice. METHODS: This mixed methods systematic review adopted a convergent, integrated design to facilitate thematic synthesis. This study followed the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. RESULTS: We identified 3 analytical themes: learning processes implemented to stimulate critical thinking, organization of the learning process to stimulate critical thinking, and factors influencing the perception of the learning process. We also identified 4 guidance models, all based on facilitator or preceptorship models using tailored instructional or learning strategies and one or several technological tools that were either generic or custom-made for specific outcomes. The main facilitators of these technology-supported guidance models were nurse educators or nurse preceptors, and the main challenges in using technology-supported guidance models were the stress associated with technical difficulties or increased cognitive load. CONCLUSIONS: Although we were able to identify 4 technology-supported guidance models, our results indicate a research gap regarding the use of these models in nursing education, with the specific aim of stimulating the development of critical thinking. Both nurse preceptors and nurse educators play a crucial role in the development of critical thinking among nursing students, and technology is essential for such development. However, technology-supported guidance models should be supervised to mitigate the associated stress. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/25126.

Factors contributing to poor sleep in critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the causes of poor sleep in critically ill patients from nurses' experiences. REVIEW METHODOLOGY: A meta-synthesis following the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research statement was conducted. Articles were searched systematically in the CINAHL, MEDLINE and Embase databases up to January 2020. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two authors working independently. Included articles were critically evaluated by both authors using the Critical Appraisal Screening Programme tool. FINDINGS: The meta-synthesis resulted in four analytical themes: (1) Inherent factors of critical illness, (2) Lack of implementation of evidence-based practice, (3) Lack of relational collaboration, (4) Hospital organisation and culture. CONCLUSION: This literature review indicates that promoting critically ill patients' sleep is difficult. Evidence-based interventions should be implemented into practice in order for nurses to be able to meet the patients' needs and improve sleep. Furthermore, the team surrounding the patient must have support from the health care organisation, and a culture change is necessary to improve communication between them to reach a shared goal to improve critically ill patients' sleep.