Search

Background: In line with the impetus traceable among the nursing staff, studies regarding the perception of Unfinished Care among students have increased in recent years as also recommended by some policy documents in the consideration that, as future members of the staff, they are expected to raise concerns about failures in the standards of care. However, no discussion of their methodological requirements has been provided to date. The aim of this study is to debate Unfinished Care explorations among nursing students and developing recommendations. Methods: A Rapid Review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, followed by a scientific discussion based on empirical evidence that emerged from the review combined with expert knowledge. Medline, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Scopus databases were searched up to May 2022. Results: In the last five years, seven studies have been conducted by researchers affiliated at the university level, involving from 18 to 737 undergraduate students across Europe. By critically analysing their key aspects, there are derived some recommendations in conducting investigations in this field as, (a) the hidden meaning of Unfinished Care investigations among students by also deciding which concept is mostly appropriate to investigate; (b) the need of establishing alliances with the clinical settings in order to involve them in such explorations; (c) more complex research methods capable of exploring this issue among students by promoting learning outcomes and not only a simple data collection; and (e) the influences of these explorations on students' wellbeing, as well as on ethical implications and that regarding the relationship between the healthcare services and the universities. Conclusion: Policymakers consider students to be key informants of the quality of nursing care issues witnessed during their clinical placements. The related emerging line of research is intriguing because of the underlying methodological, ethical and system complexities that need to be addressed according to some considerations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Competence in delirium care begins with pre-registration education for health care professionals. Although a common complication for hospitalised patients, delirium is avoidable and reversible. Delirium requires early recognition in person-centred care. Students need to learn how to identify and effectively care for 'at risk' patients. Aim: To identify and examine literature on how pre-registration health care professional students are prepared to recognise, assess, and deliver interventions to prevent delirium in practice, using digital/web based educational interventions. Method: Mixed methods systematic review with narrative synthesis. A protocol was registered with PROSPERO. The review questions and search strategy were guided by the Population, Phenomena of Interest, Context (PICo) framework. The PRISMA framework guided the screening, data extraction and analysis. Database searches (MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO & Scopus) were undertaken in April 2023 for publications from 2012 to 2023. Covidence software [30] was used to extract and manage the data. Quality appraisal was guided by the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT) [31]. Findings: Ten papers were included: mixed methods (2), qualitative (1) and quantitative (7). Medical students were the most studied group (n = 5), followed by student nurses (n = 4) and mixed nursing and medical students (n = 1). Length of learning experience varied from 12 min virtual reality (VR) to a two-week 'geriatrics' elective. Learning was enhanced by player autonomy, engagement, safety, applicability, choices, multiple perspectives and moral reasoning opportunities. Discussion: Digital programmes should be visually appealing, interactive with opportunities for practice and timely appropriate feedback. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to map and summarise the state of the research regarding doctoral programs in nursing, as well as the issues debated in the context of nursing doctoral education. A Scoping Review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension scoping reviews statement (PRISMA-ScR) was conducted. Three electronic bibliographic data bases were searched: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Complete, Medline (on EBSCO Host) and SCOPUS to identify empirical studies published between January 2009 and December 2019. The review process was based on framework identified by Arksey and O'Malley and further revised by Levac and colleagues. Analysis was performed with the use of the Donabedian framework regarding the structure of the doctorate programmes, the process, and the outcomes. Results: The review included 41 articles, mostly originating in the United States (n=26) and Europe (n=8), mainly by collecting the perceptions of students and faculty members with descriptive studies. The following issues were investigated at the (a) structure level: Prerequisite for doctoral candidates, Qualifications of faculty members, Mission of doctoral programs; (b) process level: Doctoral programs contents, Doctoral programs resources and quality, Mentoring and supervision, Doing doctorate abroad; and (c) outcome level: Academic performance outcomes in doctoral programs, Doctoral graduates' competences, Doctoral students/graduates' satisfaction, Doctoral graduates' challenges. Conclusions: Doctoral programs have mainly been investigated to date with descriptive studies, suggesting more robust research investigating the effectiveness of strategies to prepare future scientists in the nursing discipline. Doctorates are different across countries, and there is no visible cooperation of scholars internationally; their structure and processes have been reported to be stable over the years, thus not following the research development in nursing, discipline and practice expectations. Moreover, no clear framework of outcomes in the short- and long-term have been established to date to measure the quality and effectiveness of doctorate education. National and global strategies might establish common structure, process and outcome frameworks, as well as promote robust studies that are capable of assessing the effectiveness of this field of education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]