Nursing strategies to mitigate separation between hospitalized acute and critical care patients and families: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the nursing strategies used to mitigate the impact of forced separation between hospitalized acute and critical care patients and their families during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/DESIGN: A scoping review was performed in accordance with JBI methodology. SETTINGS: Those acute and critical care areas in which sudden, often unexpected, emergent episodes of illness or injury were treated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Articles written in English and French between March 2020 and September 2023 in Medline, CINAHL Complete, APA PsycInfo, Embase and the Cochrane COVID-19 study register databases that met our inclusion criteria were included. Gray literature included dissertations, theses and Base Bielefeld Academic Search Engines. RESULTS: Among the 1,357 articles screened, 46 met the criteria for inclusion. Most of the articles were published in North America. Adult critical care units were the most frequently reported settings, followed by neonatal intensive care units. The most frequently reported strategies were virtual telephone or video communications. A majority of the innovative strategies involved interprofessional collaboration at the unit level. Core components included the provision of relational nursing practices, virtual visits, tailored information, fostering relationships between family members, palliative care support regarding end of life, and general information about hospitalization and COVID-19. Pediatric care settings were more likely than adult care settings to accommodate physical visitation. CONCLUSION: Nurses used synchronous, episodic, and structured virtual interactions, either alone or as part of an interprofessional team, to mitigate separation between patients and families during the COVID-19 pandemic in acute and critical care settings. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Permanent policy changes are needed across acute and critical care settings to provide support for nurses in mitigating patient and family separation. We recommend that family members be considered as caregivers and care receivers, not visitors in patient and family-centered care in acute and critical care settings.

Effectiveness of high vs lower enteral protein intake, considering energy intake, on clinical outcomes in critically ill children: a systematic review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to evaluate the effectiveness of high vs lower enteral protein intake, considering energy intake, on clinical and nutritional outcomes in critically ill children hospitalized in the pediatric intensive care unit. INTRODUCTION: Over- and undernutrition increases the risk of morbidity and mortality in critically ill children. The impact of high vs lower enteral protein intake on clinical outcomes, considering energy intake, still needs to be investigated in children of different ages. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider studies of critically ill children (aged between ≥ 37 weeks gestational age and < 18 years) admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit for a minimum of 48 hours and receiving enteral nutrition. Randomized controlled trials comparing high vs lower enteral protein intake, considering energy intake, will be eligible. Primary outcomes will include clinical and nutritional outcomes, such as length of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit and nitrogen balance. METHODS: Using the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness, we will search for randomized controlled trials published in English, French, Italian, Spanish, and German in electronic databases, including MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, from database inception until the present. We will also search clinical trial registers and, if required, contact authors. Two independent reviewers will screen and select studies for inclusion, data extraction, and assessment of methodological quality. A third reviewer will be consulted if necessary. A statistical meta-analysis will be performed if feasible. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42022315325.

Pharmacist interventions to improve hypertension management: protocol for a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Hypertension management remains a major public health challenge in primary care. Innovative interventions to improve blood pressure (BP) control are needed. One approach is through community-based models of care with the involvement of pharmacists and other non-physician healthcare professionals. Our objective is to systematically review the evidence of the impact of pharmacist care alone or in collaboration with other healthcare professionals on BP among hypertensive outpatients compared with usual care. Because these interventions can be complex, with various components, the effect size may differ between the type of interventions. One major focus of our study will be to assess carefully the heterogeneity in the effects of these interventions to identify which ones work best in a given healthcare setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Systematic searches of the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica (Embase) and Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases will be conducted. Randomised controlled trials assessing the effect of pharmacist interventions on BP among outpatients will be included. Examples for pharmacist interventions are patient education, feedback to physician and medication management. The outcome will be the change in BP or BP at follow-up or BP control. Results will be synthesised descriptively and, if appropriate, will be pooled across studies to perform meta-analyses. If feasible, we will also perform a network meta-analysis to compare interventions that have not been compared directly head-to-head by using indirect evidence. Heterogeneity in the effect will be evaluated through prespecified subgroup and stratified analyses, accounting notably for the type and intensity of interventions, patients' characteristics and healthcare setting. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as the results will be drawn from currently available published literature. Outcomes of the review will be shared through peer-reviewed journal and used for implementation policy. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021279751.

Nurse interventions to improve medication adherence among discharged older adults: a systematic review.

Background: discharged older adult inpatients are often prescribed numerous medications. However, they only take about half of their medications and many stop treatments entirely. Nurse interventions could improve medication adherence among this population. Objective: to conduct a systematic review of trials that assessed the effects of nursing interventions to improve medication adherence among discharged, home-dwelling and older adults. Method: we conducted a systematic review according to the methods in the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and reported results according to the PRISMA statement. We searched for controlled clinical trials (CCTs) and randomised CCTs (RCTs), published up to 8 November 2016 (using electronic databases, grey literature and hand searching), that evaluated the effects of nurse interventions conducted alone or in collaboration with other health professionals to improve medication adherence among discharged older adults. Medication adherence was defined as the extent to which a patient takes medication as prescribed. Results: out of 1,546 records identified, 82 full-text papers were evaluated and 14 studies were included-11 RCTs and 2 CCTs. Overall, 2,028 patients were included (995 in intervention groups; 1,033 in usual-care groups). Interventions were nurse-led in seven studies and nurse-collaborative in seven more. In nine studies, adherence was higher in the intervention group than in the usual-care group, with the difference reaching statistical significance in eight studies. There was no substantial difference in increased medication adherence whether interventions were nurse-led or nurse-collaborative. Four of the 14 studies were of relatively high quality. Conclusion: nurse-led and nurse-collaborative interventions moderately improved adherence among discharged older adults. There is a need for large, well-designed studies using highly reliable tools for measuring medication adherence.