Prevention interventions for interpersonal violence occurring under the influence of alcohol: A mixed method systematic review.

AIMS: To (a) explore risk indicators related to interpersonal violence occurring under the influence of alcohol and to (b) search for interventions addressed towards violence perpetrators to prevent violence occurring under the influence of alcohol. DESIGN: Mixed method systematic review. This study has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews with register number CRD42021217848. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus in October 2021. REVIEW METHODS: Two researchers independently examined 1076 papers following the inclusion criteria. After three rounds of selection (title, abstract and full text), the quality and bias assessments were conducted independently by two reviewers. The data were analysed with inductive and deductive content analyses. RESULTS: Of the 1076 papers retrieved, 16 papers were eligible for inclusion, addressing 13 different interventions. Interventions were divided into three types (individual-, group- and family-level) and were constructed on several background frameworks, with cognitive behavioural therapy being the most common framework. Family-level interventions seemed to yield the most effective results. Violence occurring under the influence of alcohol was mostly researched as men being the perpetrators and women being the victims of violence. Several indicators that increased the risk of violence victimization or perpetration, such as trait jealousy and disparity in education, were identified. CONCLUSION: Interventions emerging from the systematic review were heterogenous, and the outcomes of the interventions were versatile. The disparity between interventions and outcome measures made it challenging to reliably compare the effectiveness between interventions. Using standardized outcome measure instruments and unifying research on interventions are needed to reliably assess the effectiveness of different interventions.

Continuing education for advanced practice nurses: A scoping review.

AIM: The aim of the study was to identify the nature and extent of scientific research addressing continuing education for advanced practice nurses. DESIGN: A scoping review. REVIEW METHODS: The Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search was conducted on 17 September 2023 via CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and the Joanna Briggs Institute's Evidence-Based Practice Database for research articles published between 2012 and 2023. RESULTS: Nineteen papers were included in this review. Scientific research on continuing education for advanced practice nursing roles (i.e. nurse practitioner, clinical nurse specialist) has primarily been conducted in the United States and mostly addresses online-delivered continuing education interventions for clinical care competency. Most of the interventions targeted nurse practitioners. CONCLUSION: Continuing education has a pivotal role in supporting advanced practice nursing competency development. In addition to clinical care, future continuing education research should focus on other advanced practice nursing competencies, such as education, leadership, supporting organizational strategies, research and evidence implementation. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Continuing education programmes for advanced practice nurses should be rigorously developed, implemented and evaluated to support the quality and effectiveness of patient care. IMPACT: Continuing education for advanced practice nursing roles is an understudied phenomenon. This review highlights future research priorities and may inform the development of continuing education programmes. REPORTING METHOD: PRISMA-ScR.

Finnish Version of the Specialist Outcomes and Barriers Analysis Scale: Evaluation of Psychometric Properties.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Finnish version of the Specialist Outcomes and Barriers Analysis Scale. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional survey study. METHODS: Cultural adaptation of the translation and content validity of the translated instrument were assessed by expert panelists (n = 5) using the content validity index. The construct validity was assessed with principal component analysis using the survey data of Finnish registered nurses (n = 60). Scale reliability was assessed with Cronbach's α values. All study phases were conducted in 2021. RESULTS: The items (n = 59) of the scale were critically evaluated by the experts. The full-scale content validity was revealed as excellent (0.92). In terms of construct validity, the scale was analyzed separately for outcomes and barriers. The outcomes section revealed a 5-component structure with an overall Cronbach's α coefficient of .96, and the barriers section, a 2-component structure with an overall Cronbach's α coefficient of .82, indicating adequate reliability of the scale. CONCLUSION: The Finnish version of the scale showed excellent content and construct validity. The Cronbach's α values represented adequate reliability of the Specialist Outcomes and Barriers Analysis scale when measuring nurses' perceived practice outcomes and barriers in the Finnish context.