Missed nursing care in acute care hospital settings in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Missed nursing care undermines nursing standards of care and minimising this phenomenon is crucial to maintaining adequate patient safety and the quality of patient care. The concept is a neglected aspect of human resource for health thinking, and it remains understudied in low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) settings which have 90% of the global nursing workforce shortages. Our objective in this review was to document the prevalence of missed nursing care in LMIC, identify the categories of nursing care that are most missed and summarise the reasons for this. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review searching Medline, Embase, Global Health, WHO Global index medicus and CINAHL from their inception up until August 2021. Publications were included if they were conducted in an LMIC and reported on any combination of categories, reasons and factors associated with missed nursing care within in-patient settings. We assessed the quality of studies using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies met our inclusion criteria. These studies were mainly cross-sectional, from upper middle-income settings and mostly relied on nurses' self-report of missed nursing care. The measurement tools used, and their reporting were inconsistent across the literature. Nursing care most frequently missed were non-clinical nursing activities including those of comfort and communication. Inadequate personnel numbers were the most important reasons given for missed care. CONCLUSIONS: Missed nursing care is reported for all key nursing task areas threatening care quality and safety. Data suggest nurses prioritise technical activities with more non-clinical activities missed, this undermines holistic nursing care. Improving staffing levels seems a key intervention potentially including sharing of less skilled activities. More research on missed nursing care and interventions to tackle it to improve quality and safety is needed in LMIC. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021286897.

The two-bucket problem of unproven stem cell interventions.

The two-bucket problem of unproven stem cell interventions (SCIs) continues to bifurcate good (ethical) from bad (unethical) practices in the translation of stem cell medicine in ways that divert attention from other salient and challenging questions. It causes scholars to focus narrowly on reprimanding bad actors through legal and regulatory approaches and distracts from other important considerations such as how best to balance evidence with unmet patient needs and address misinformation about unproven stem cell interventions potentially changing patient behavior. The stem cell science community needs to consider a range of ethical practices and aim to address important questions that have yet not received sufficient consideration.

Diagnosis and treatment of patients with antiphospholipid syndrome: a mixed-method evaluation of care in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: The aims were to gain insight into the care provided to patients with APS in The Netherlands and to identify areas for improvement from the perspective of both patients and medical specialists. METHODS: APS care was evaluated using qualitative and quantitative methods. Perspectives on APS care were explored using semi-structured interviews with medical specialists, patient focus groups and a cross-sectional, online patient survey. In order to assess current practice, medical records were reviewed retrospectively to collect data on clinical and laboratory manifestations and pharmacological treatment in six Dutch hospitals. RESULTS: Fourteen medical specialists were interviewed, 14 patients participated in the focus groups and 79 patients completed the survey. Medical records of 237 patients were reviewed. Medical record review showed that only one-third of patients were diagnosed with APS within 3 months after entering specialist care. The diagnostic approach and management varied between centres and specialists. Almost 10% of all patients and 7% of triple-positive patients with thrombotic APS were not receiving any anticoagulant treatment at the time of medical record review. Correspondingly, poor recognition and fragmentation of care were reported as the main problems by medical specialists. Additionally, patients reported the lack of accessible, reliable patient education, psychosocial support and trust in physicians as important points for improvement. CONCLUSION: Delayed diagnosis, variability in management strategies and fragmentation of care were important limitations of APS care identified in this study. A remarkable 10% of patients did not receive any anticoagulant treatment.

Individualising Chronic Care Management by Analysing Patients' Needs - A Mixed Method Approach.

BACKGROUND: Modern health systems are increasingly faced with the challenge to provide effective, affordable and accessible health care for people with chronic conditions. As evidence on the specific unmet needs and their impact on health outcomes is limited, practical research is needed to tailor chronic care to individual needs of patients with diabetes. Qualitative approaches to describe professional and informal caregiving will support understanding the complexity of chronic care. Results are intended to provide practical recommendations to be used for systematic implementation of sustainable chronic care models. METHOD: A mixed method study was conducted. A standardised survey (n = 92) of experts in chronic care using mail responses to open-ended questions was conducted to analyse existing chronic care programs focusing on effective, problematic and missing components. An expert workshop (n = 22) of professionals and scientists of a European funded research project MANAGE CARE was used to define a limited number of unmet needs and priorities of elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and comorbidities. This list was validated and ranked using a multilingual online survey (n = 650). Participants of the online survey included patients, health care professionals and other stakeholders from 56 countries. RESULTS: The survey indicated that current care models need to be improved in terms of financial support, case management and the consideration of social care. The expert workshop identified 150 patient needs which were summarised in 13 needs dimensions. The online survey of these pre-defined dimensions revealed that financial issues, education of both patients and professionals, availability of services as well as health promotion are the most important unmet needs for both patients and professionals. CONCLUSION: The study uncovered competing demands which are not limited to medical conditions. The findings emphasise that future care models need to focus stronger on individual patient needs and promote their active involvement in co-design and implementation. Future research is needed to develop new chronic care models providing evidence-based and practical implications for the regional care setting.