Historic redlining and health outcomes: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the existing literature on the associations between historic redlining and modern-day health outcomes across the lifespan. METHOD: This review searched PubMed and CINAHL for peer-reviewed, data-based articles examining the relationship between historic redlining and any health outcome. Articles were appraised using the JBI critical appraisal checklist. The results were synthesized using a narrative summary approach. RESULTS: Thirty-six articles were included and focused on various health outcomes, including cardiovascular outcomes, breast cancer incidence and mortality, firearm injury or death, birth-related outcomes, and asthma outcomes. Most of the included articles (n = 31; 86%) found significant associations between historic redlining and adverse health outcomes such as increased cardiovascular disease, higher rates of preterm births, increased cancer incidence, reduced survival time after breast cancer diagnosis, and increased firearm injury incidence. DISCUSSION: This review demonstrates the persistent effect of historic redlining on individuals' health. Public health nurses should recognize redlining as a form of structural racism when caring for affected communities and should advocate for policies and programs that advance health equity. Nurse researchers should develop and test multilevel interventions to address systemic racism and improve health outcomes in communities affected by redlining.

Sleep Interventions for Informal Caregivers of Persons with Dementia: A Systematic Review.

We conducted a systematic review on the state of the science related to sleep interventions for informal caregivers of persons with Alzheimer's disease or related dementia (ADRD). This review included English-written, peer-reviewed articles that studied the effect of an intervention on sleep health outcomes for informal caregivers of persons with ADRD. Our search yielded 15 articles that met our a priori inclusion criteria. We categorized interventions into four categories: environmental, physical, cognitive, and collaborative. Intervention effects were heterogeneous, with most yielding nonsignificant sleep health effects. There is a need for theoretically sound and robust sleep health interventions for informal caregiver samples. Future research in this area could benefit from the use of more controlled, pragmatic, and adaptive research designs, and the use of objective measures that conceptually represent the multiple domains of sleep health to enhance intervention quality.

Decision fatigue among clinical nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to report the psychometric properties, including validity and reliability, of the decision fatigue scale (DFS). BACKGROUND: Decision fatigue may impair nurses' ability to make sound clinical decisions and negatively impact patient care. Given the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological well-being and the workplace environment, decision fatigue may be even more apparent among clinical nurses. Valid assessment of this condition among clinical nurses may inform supportive interventions to mitigate the negative sequelae associated with states of decision fatigue. DESIGN: This study was a secondary analysis of a parent study using a cross-sectional descriptive design. METHODS: A convenience sample of 160 staff nurses was recruited online from across the United States. Participants completed a demographic questionnaire and subjective measures of decision fatigue, nursing practice environment scale and traumatic stress. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), correlation coefficients and internal consistency reliability coefficients were computed to examine the DFS's validity and reliability within this sample. RESULTS: The EFA yielded a single factor, 9-item version of the DFS. The DFS scores were strongly correlated with traumatic stress and moderately correlated with the nursing practice environment, and the scale displayed appropriate internal consistency. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first known study to provide evidence of the DFS's validity and reliability in a sample of registered nurses working during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study provide evidence of a reliable and valid assessment instrument for decision fatigue that can be used to measure the burden of decision-making among registered nurses. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Given the relationship between traumatic stress and the nursing work environment, decision fatigue may be a modifiable target for interventions that can enhance the quality of decision-making among clinical nurses.