Search

Alcohol and other drug (AOD) nurse practitioners have an advanced scope of practice that allows them to diagnose, prescribe pharmacological treatments for alcohol and other substance use disorders, and monitor physical and mental health. The Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) is used to understand barriers and facilitators to implementation by applying three conditions of behaviour change (capability, opportunity, and motivation—the COM‐B framework). The aim of this paper is to describe the current AOD nurse practitioner workforce, and to explore barriers and facilitators to AOD nurse practitioner uptake in Australia. A mixed method approach was used in this study: a survey to determine the current state of the AOD nurse practitioner workforce (n = 41) and qualitative interviews with 14 participants to determine barriers to endorsement and ongoing work as a nurse practitioner. Interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis and mapped to the COM‐B framework. The AOD nurse practitioner is a highly specialized provider of holistic care to people who use alcohol and other drugs, with AOD nurse practitioners performing advanced roles such as prescribing and medication management. However, there are several barriers to the further uptake of AOD nurse practitioners in Australia, including varied organizational support, a lack of support for the higher study required to become a nurse practitioner and a lack of available positions. Arguably, nurse practitioners are key to addressing prescriber shortages inherent in AOD treatment settings. In addition, they are equipped to provide true holistic care. We recommend that barriers are addressed to expand the AOD nurse practitioner workforce in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to achieve consensus regarding what distinguishes specialist from non-specialist palliative care to inform service organisation and delivery to patients with life-limiting conditions. Methods: A three-phase Delphi study was undertaken, involving qualitative interviews and two questionnaire cycles. Thirty-one clinicians (nurses, doctors and social workers) working with a wide range of patients participated in interviews, of whom 27 completed two questionnaire cycles. Results: Consensus was gained on 75 items that define specialist palliative care and distinguish it from non-specialist palliative care. Consensus was gained that specialist palliative care clinicians have advanced knowledge of identifying dying, skills to assess and manage complex symptoms to improve quality of life, have advanced communication skills and perform distinct clinical practices (e.g. working with the whole family as the unit of care and providing support in complex bereavement). Non-specialist palliative care involves discussions around futile or burdensome treatments, and care for people who are dying. Conclusions: Areas of connection were identified: clinicians from disease-specific specialties should be more involved in leading discussions on futile or burdensome treatment and providing care to people in their last months and days of life, in collaboration with specialists in palliative care when required. What is known about the topic?: At present there is no evidence-based definition or agreement about what constitutes specialist palliative care (as opposed to palliative care delivered by non-specialists) in the Australian Capital Territory. An agreed definition is needed to effectively determine the workforce required and its clinical skill mix, and to clarify roles and expectations to mitigate risks in not adequately providing services to patients with life-limiting conditions. What does this paper add?: This paper offers, for the first time, an evidence-based definition that distinguishes specialist palliative care from non-specialist palliative care. End of life care and bereavement support are not just the remit of specialist palliative care clinicians. Clinicians from beyond specialist palliative care should lead discussions about futile or burdensome treatment. What are the implications for practitioners?: The findings of this study can facilitate implementation of palliative care strategies by enabling practitioners and patients to distinguish who should be delivering what care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to examine the relationship between the quality of reflective practice groups and nurses' professional quality of life. Background: Previous nursing research has indicated that reflective practice groups are positively associated with personal resources, job resources, and professional quality of life for nurses. The specific impact of the groups however, has not been distinguished from the impact of personal and job resources, and the explanatory mechanisms for the associations are unclear. Design/Methods: This study utilised a cross-sectional, quantitative research methodology with 184 Australian nurses from a regional teaching hospital who attended reflective practice groups (88.5% female). Surveys captured demographics, personal resources (i.e. self-efficacy), job resources (i.e. job autonomy, skill discretion, job social support, and group cohesion) and perceived quality of reflective practice groups, as measured by the Clinical Supervision Evaluation Questionnaire, alongside professional quality of life outcomes. Results: Participants who rated reflective practice groups as 'high quality' or more effective were associated with significantly higher scores for personal and job resources of self-efficacy, autonomy, skill discretion, social support, and group cohesion. These resources, in turn, correlated with more positive professional quality of life scores; in particular compassion satisfaction and burnout. Discussion: While the study used cross-sectional data and causality cannot be inferred, the findings do indicate a clear association between attending effectively facilitated reflective practice groups and greater personal and job resources. This may indicate that the groups provide nurses with an opportunity to build or enhance these resources. Furthermore, it is proposed that this could explain a mechanism by which reflective practice groups can indirectly impact positively on professional quality of life for nurses by building resources. Future research should explore causality longitudinally. Conclusion: This study provides evidence that nurses who perceive the groups favorably have greater social support, enhanced self-efficacy, more autonomy, and increased skill discretion. These factors also align with the restorative and formative benefits of supervision. Greater personal and job resources, in turn, can enhance professional quality of life. Whilst mediating pathways have been identified, it is still not possible to definitively attribute the development of these resources to group participation. Implications for Research, Policy, and Practice: There is growing evidence to support reflective practice groups as a viable form of group clinical supervision for nurses. It is important to ensure reflective practice groups are effectively facilitated. What is already known about the topic? Correlational data indicates that high quality reflective practice groups may offer a cost-effective form of group clinical supervision, for nurses; providing support and helping them deal with what can be a challenging professional environment. Reflective practice groups have been linked to a range of benefits across individual and organisational levels, including; 1) increased job satisfaction, 2) higher quality of patient care, less critical incidents, 3) higher rates of staff retainment and reduced leave, and 4) enhancing the integrity of the nursing profession through accountability and skill development. What this paper adds Despite these claims, little is known regarding the mechanisms underpinning these documented benefits. This study provides a theoretically driven explanation; that reflective practice groups provide an opportunity for job crafting, in which nurses actively build resources (i.e. skills development critical thinking and social support), mitigating some of the negative psychological consequences associated with nursing. This information can help guide policy, practice, and the development of effective interventions to provide support and supervision for nurses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To examine in a sample of nurses working in acute-care wards, self-reported perceptions of the: 1) patient; family; nurse; doctor; and health system-related barriers to the provision of optimal end-of-life care to people who are dying in hospital; and 2) five barriers which, if removed, would lead to the greatest improvements in hospital-based end-of-life care. Background: Nurses play a central role in caring for dying patients and can offer a unique perspective about the factors that impact the quality of end-oflife care delivered in hospitals. Study design and methods: Two hundred and fifteen registered and enrolled nurses from three metropolitan and three rural hospitals across three health services completed a questionnaire-based, cross-sectional study between April 2016 and June 2017. Results: Nurses perceive that doctors continue to treat for too long (79% ranked as a large barrier); families have unrealistic expectations about a patient's prognosis (73%); junior doctors are unwilling to alter the decision of senior doctors (67%); doctors do not adequately explain the dying process (66%); and doctors have inadequate training in end-of-life care (66%). Nurses indicated that doctors reducing the length of active treatment and families having a more realistic expectation about life-expectancy would lead to the greatest improvement in end-oflife care in hospitals. Discussion: In this study of nurses working in a wide range of acute care settings across rural and metropolitan locations, substantial barriers to the provision of high-quality end-of-life care were perceived across all facets of healthcare provision. Important barriers included the continuation of potentially futile treatment, inadequacy of symptom control, and poor communication between doctors, patients and their families. Conclusion: Nurses perceive a range of patient; family; provider; and health system-related challenges to the provision of optimal end-of-life care in hospital. Findings highlight potential areas for improvement as part of a coordinated approach to optimising the provision of end-of-life care in hospitals. Future goals should include larger-scale, longitudinal studies across various states and territories to inform the development of interventions that can help to address the identified gaps in service provision. Implications for research, policy, and practice: This study has highlighted the need to involve all stakeholders when designing interventions to improve end-of-life care. Nurses can provide valuable insight into the factors that can make the greatest impact in improving care provision. It suggests that the provision of high-quality end-oflife care in hospitals is complex, and that there is substantial overlap between items nurses perceive to be barriers in each of the five domains of care provision. To achieve sustainable improvement in the quality of end-of-life care provided in hospitals, a multi-factorial, and collegial, approach to designing interventions will be needed. What is already known about the topic? • End-of-life care is increasingly being provided in hospital settings. • Nurses are an important source of information and support for dying patients and their families. • Few studies have explored nurses' perceptions of the barriers to the provision of high-quality end-oflife care across all domains of healthcare provision. What this paper adds: • Important barriers include continuation of potentially futile treatment, adequacy of symptom control, and poor communication between doctors, patients, and their families. • Findings can support the design of more effective intervention strategies to mitigate identified barriers and achieve improvements in the quality of end-of-life care delivered in hospital. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: This qualitative study explored the experiences of neonatal nurses with facilitating closeness between parents and babies with congenital abnormalities in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Background: Babies with congenital abnormalities often require admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. Parents may experience emotional distancing from their baby, due to their response to their baby's congenital abnormality, as well as physical separation due to their baby's hospitalisation in the NICU. NICU nurses can help facilitate the development of closeness between babies and parents in the NICU. Method: This qualitative interpretive description study involved face‐to‐face, semi‐structured interviews with twelve neonatal nurses following which the data collected were thematically analysed. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist were used in preparing this paper. Results: Three major themes emerged from the analysis—"Everyone copes differently," "You have to focus on what is the normal thing" and "It's very much an individualised approach." Participants often felt unprepared to care for babies with congenital abnormalities and implemented coping mechanisms to overcome the emotional labour they experienced. Skin‐to‐skin cuddles were considered the most beneficial strategy for parents to develop closeness with their baby. Participants recognised that they sometimes "pushed" parents into engaging with their baby. Participants highlighted the importance of individualised, supportive care for these parents. Conclusions: Neonatal nurses require increased education about congenital abnormalities and individualised care to support them in caring for babies with congenital abnormalities. Relevance to clinical practice: Further research is needed on parental experience of developing closeness with a baby with a congenital abnormality in the NICU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives This paper aims to discuss and explore food security in the context of community health nursing, to provide insight about how frontline workers may identify whether their client is food secure. Design A qualitative descriptive design pilot study, using questionnaire and unstructured interviews. Setting Community health services across Sydney. Subject How community health nurses identify whether their client is food secure. Method Three community health nurses were interviewed and their responses recorded. Two student nurses participated in a focus group during professional work experience in community health. Findings/Results Although community health nurses claim they can identify whether their clients are food (in)secure, it remains unclear how they operationalise this claim, and indeed if they do, what the outcome may be for their clients' health determinants. Primary argument To raise awareness and stimulate discussion about food security as a social determinant of health, and whether community nurses have a role identifying client food security. Conclusion Food (in)security is increasingly recognised as a social determinant of health, with evidence that the prevalence of food insecurity is increasing in Australia. It is acknowledged that community health nurses have established professional relationships with their clients, and that food insecurity may be identified though formal and informal means. A more open discussion is required about food (in)security and potential ways in which it may be discussed in nonjudgemental, sensitive ways. Further investigation is required to interview community health nurses, in the context of their relationships with clients, how they establish whether food security is occurring and being maintained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]