Search

The global COVID‐19 pandemic challenged the world—how it functions, how people move in the social worlds and how government/government services and people interact. Health services, operating under the principles of new public management, have undertaken rapid changes to service delivery and models of care. What has become apparent is the mechanisms within which contemporary health services operate and how services are not prioritising the person at the centre of care. Person‐centred care (PCC) is the philosophical premise upon which models of health care are developed and implemented. Given the strain that COVID‐19 has placed on the health services and the people who deliver the care, it is essential to explore the tensions that exist in this space. This article suggests that before the pandemic, PCC was largely rhetoric, and rendered invisible during the pandemic. The paper presents an investigation into the role of PCC in these challenging times, adopting a Foucauldian lens, specifically governmentality and biopolitics, to examine the policies, priorities and practical implications as health services pivoted and adapted to changing and acute demands. Specifically, this paper draws on the Australian experience, including shifting nursing workforce priorities and additional challenges resulting from public health directives such as lockdowns and limitations. The findings from this exploration open a space for discussion around the rhetoric of PCC, the status of nurses and that which has been lost to the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The electronic medication administration record (eMAR) is an eHealth system that has replaced the traditional paper‐based medication administration used in many healthcare settings. Research has highlighted that eHealth technologies can change working methods and professional roles in both expected and unexpected ways. To date, there is sparse research that has explored how nurses and nurse assistants (NA) in home healthcare experience eMAR in relation to their work environment. Aim: The aim was to explore how nurses and nurse assistants experienced their work environment, in terms of job‐demand, control, and support in a Swedish home healthcare setting where an electronic medication administration record had been implemented to facilitate delegation of medical administration. Method: We took a qualitative approach, where focus groups were used as data collection method. The focus groups included 16 nurses and nine NAs employed in a Swedish municipality where an eMAR had been implemented 6 months before the first focus groups were performed. The analysis adapted the job‐demand‐control‐support model, by condensing the professionals' experiences into the three categories of demand, control, and support, in alignment with the model. Results: NAs experienced high levels of job demand and low levels of job control. The use of the eMAR limited NAs' ability to control their work, in terms of priorities, content, and timing. In contrast, the nurses described demands as high but manageable, and described having a high level of control. Both professions found the eMar supportive. Conclusion: Nurses and NAs in home healthcare experienced changes in their work environment regarding demand, control, and support when an eMAR was implemented to facilitate delegation of medical administration. In general, nurses were satisfied with the eMAR. However, NAs felt that the eMAR did not cover all aspects of their daily work. Healthcare organisations should be aware of the changes that digitalisation processes entail in the work environment of nurses and NAs in home healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Identify and map international evidence regarding innovations led by or involving advanced practice nurses in response to COVID‐19. Background: COVID‐19 necessitated unprecedented innovation in the organization and delivery of healthcare. Although advanced practice nurses have played a pivotal role during the pandemic, evidence of their contributions to innovations has not been synthesized. Evidence is needed to inform policies, practices, and research about the optimal use of advanced practice nurses. Methods: A scoping review was conducted and reported using the PRISMA‐ScR checklist. Electronic databases were searched for peer‐reviewed articles published between January 2020 and December 2021. Papers were included that focused on innovations emerging in response to COVID‐19 and involved advanced practice nurses. Results: Fifty‐one articles were included. Four themes were identified including telehealth, supporting and transforming care, multifaceted approaches, and provider education. Half of the articles used brief and mostly noncomparative approaches to evaluate innovations. Conclusion: This is the first synthesis of international evidence examining the contributions of advanced practice nurses during the pandemic. Advanced practice nurses provided leadership for the innovation needed to rapidly respond to healthcare needs resulting from COVID‐19. Innovations challenged legislative restrictions on practice, enabled implementation of telehealth and new models of care, and promoted evidence‐informed and patient‐centered care. Implications for practice: Advanced practice nurses led, designed, implemented, and evaluated innovations in response to COVID‐19. They facilitated the use of telehealth, supported or transformed models of care, and enabled health providers through education, mentorship, and mental health support. Implication for policy: Advanced practice nurses are a critical resource for innovation and health system improvement. Permanent removal of legislative and regulatory barriers to their full scope of practice is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]