Search

Background: The Thrive program is an evidenced-based care model for Medicaid-insured adults in the hospital-to-home transition. A substantial portion of Thrive participants live with serious mental illness (SMI), yet Thrive's efficacy has not been tested among these patients. Purpose: To compare 30-day postdischarge outcomes between Thrive participants with and without SMI and explore Thrive's appropriateness and acceptability among participants with SMI. Methods: We conducted a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study of 252 (62 with SMI) Thrive participants discharged from an academic medical center from February 2021 to August 2023. Interviews of participants with SMI were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis. Results: Participants with and without SMI experienced similar rates of 30-day readmissions, emergency room visits, and postdischarge follow-up visits, with these differences being nonsignificant. Participants with SMI were highly satisfied with Thrive's care coordination and attention to social needs, yet participants suggested stronger connections to behavioral health care. Conclusions: Participants with and without SMI benefit equitably from Thrive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Increasing diversity in the nurse practitioner (NP) workforce is key to improving outcomes among patients who experience health inequities. However, few studies to date have examined the specific mechanisms by which NPs from diverse backgrounds address inequities in care delivery. Purpose: To explore Black NPs' efforts in addressing inequities, and the facilitators and barriers they face in doing so. Methodology: We conducted focus groups and interviews of Black NPs (N = 16) in the greater Philadelphia area in early 2022, just following the height of the COVID-19 pandemic and the social unrest of the early 2020s. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Emergent themes included: Strategies Utilized to Address Health Inequities; Burnout & the Minority Tax; Risks & Rewards of Taking a Stance; and Uneven Promises of Organizational Engagement. Nurse practitioners prioritized patient-centered, culturally congruent care, taking additional time to explore community resources and learn about patients' lives to facilitate care planning. Participants advocated to administrators for resources to address inequities while simultaneously navigating organizational dynamics, micro aggressions, and racism. Finally, NPs identified organizational-level barriers, leading to emotional exhaustion and several participants' intent to leave their roles. Conclusions: Black NPs use a myriad of strategies to improve equity, yet frequently face substantial barriers and emotional exhaustion in doing so with little change to the inequities in care. Implications: The NP workforce has a critical role to play in reducing health inequities. The strategies outlined by Black NPs in this study offer a roadmap for all clinicians and health care organizations to prioritize equity in care delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced awareness that the health of populations is inextricably linked around the globe. Nurses require increased knowledge and preparation in global health. Nursing educators need examples of how to improve content in the curriculum. Aims: The purpose of this paper is to describe reconceptualization of a master’s level nursing course entitled “Population Health in a Global Society” to include global health competencies. Methods: We identified four global health competencies within the following three domains: globalization of health and healthcare; collaboration, partnering, and communication; and sociocultural and political awareness. Implementation: We utilized guest lectures, a panel discussion, discussion forums and an independent research assignment. The methods used were well received by students, and the content delivered improved their perceived knowledge in global population health. Discussion: The global health domains and competencies provided a roadmap for improving our course to focus on population health from a global perspective. Conclusion: In order to prepare nurses to contribute to global population health, population health courses should integrate global health competencies. The content of the revised course will better prepare nurses who will practice in a wide variety of settings and is designed for interdisciplinary education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence exists on racial and gender disparities in chronic pain management among veterans. Most literature has described physicians' disparate opioid prescribing patterns, although it is unknown if prescribing disparities exist among nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) or among prescription of nonopioid analgesic strategies. Purpose: To identify patient characteristics associated with opioid and nonopioid prescriptions among Veterans Affairs (VA) chronic pain patients by primary care physicians, NPs, and PAs. Methodology: We used data from the VA's Survey of Health care Experience of Patients and Corporate Data Warehouse from October 2015 to September 2016. Outcomes included opioid and nonopioid analgesic prescriptions. Patient characteristics included race/ethnicity, gender, education level, age, and clinical characteristics (comorbidities, self-reported health, and self-reported mental health). Logistic regression was performed to test for associations of patient characteristics with outcomes. Results: Patients who were White, male, age 41-64 years, and with no postsecondary education had higher odds of receiving an opioid prescription (all p-values # .01), whereas patients who were Black, female, and <65 years old had higher odds of a nonopioid prescription (all p-values < .01). Having 5+ comorbidities and fair/poor self-reported health increased the odds of opioid and nonopioid prescriptions (all p-values < .01). Conclusions: Disparities in race, gender, and educational level significantly affect how primary care NPs, PAs, and physicians manage chronic pain. Implications: NPs and other primary care providers should pursue training opportunities to identify and mitigate potential biases that may affect their practice. Future research should take an intersectional lens in examining the source of chronic pain disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic pain affects 100 million Americans and is most often treated in primary care, where the health care provider shortage remains a challenge. Nurse practitioners (NPs) represent a growing solution, yet their patterns of chronic pain management are understudied. Additionally, prescriptive authority limitations in many states limit NPs from prescribing opioids and often exist due to concerns of NP-driven opioid overprescribing. Little evidence on NP pain management prescribing patterns exists to address these issues. Objective: Systematic review, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, to examine opioid and nonopioid prescribing patterns of physicians, NPs, and physician assistants (PAs) in primary care. Eligible studies scored >=60% on the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal checklist. Data sources: Searches within PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Conclusions: Three themes were elucidated: 1) opioid prescribing in primary care, 2) similarities and differences in opioid prescribing by provider type, and 3) nonopioid pain management strategies. All provider groups had similar opioid prescribing patterns, although NPs and PAs may be slightly less likely to prescribe opioids than physicians. Although some studies suggested that NPs/PAs had higher opioid prescribing rates compared with physicians, methodological flaws may undermine these conclusions. Evidence is also lacking on nonopioid prescribing patterns across disciplines. Implications for practice: Nurse practitioner/PA prescriptive authority limitations may not be as effective of a solution for addressing opioid overprescribing as transdisciplinary interventions targeting the highest subset of opioid prescribers. Future research should examine prescribing patterns of nonopioid, including nonpharmacologic, therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The human papillomavirus (HPV) causes many anogenital and oral cancers affecting young adults in the United States. Vaccination during adolescence can prevent HPV‐associated cancers, but vaccine uptake among adolescents is low and influenced by factors serving as barriers and facilitators to HPV vaccination. In this systematic review, we synthesized research using the socioecological framework model to examine individual‐level, relationship‐level, community‐level, and societal‐level factors that influence HPV vaccine initiation and completion among US adolescents. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines were used to guide the methodology for this review. An electronic search was conducted in January 2020 using PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest Central, Scopus, and American Psychological Association PsycInfo databases. The Joanna Briggs Institute tools were used to assess the quality for the 57 studies included in this review. The most consistent influences of HPV vaccination included age at vaccination, awareness, and knowledge about HPV vaccination, socioeconomic status, insurance status, race/ethnicity, and preventative care behaviors at the individual level. Provider recommendation, familial/peer support of vaccination, and parental health behaviors were influences at the relationship level. Although fewer findings elucidated community‐level and societal‐level influences, high‐poverty areas, high‐risk communities with large proportions of racial/ethnic minority groups, healthcare facilities servicing children, and combined health policies appear to serve as facilitators of HPV initiation and completion. Findings from this review can inform culturally relevant and age‐specific interventions and multi‐level policies aiming to improve HPV vaccination coverage in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In June 2016, the American Academy of Pediatrics released its new policy statement recommending a full-time registered nurse in every school building. Indeed, increasing attention is being focused on school nursing, in part due to recent legislation, including the Affordable Care Act, the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act, and the Every Student Succeeds Act. Advocating for nursing practice within an education setting presents unique challenges in terms of changing the common perception of school nurses, variances in funding streams for school nursing, and the ability to link health outcomes with educational outcomes. The purpose of this article is to discuss the rationale for a school nurse in every building along with presenting action steps that individual and groups of school nurses can utilize to advocate for a full-time registered nurse in every school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People diagnosed with a co-occurring serious mental illness (SMI; ie, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia) but hospitalized for a nonpsychiatric condition experience higher rates of readmissions and other adverse outcomes, in part due to poorly coordinated care transitions. Current hospital-to-home transitional care programs lack a focus on the integrated social, medical, and mental health needs of these patients. The Thrive clinical pathway provides transitional care support for patients insured by Medicaid with multiple chronic conditions by focusing on posthospitalization medical concerns and the social determinants of health. This study seeks to evaluate an adapted version of Thrive that also meets the needs of patients with co-occurring SMI discharged from a nonpsychiatric hospitalization., Objective: This study aimed to (1) engage staff and community advisors in participatory implementation processes to adapt the Thrive clinical pathway for all Medicaid-insured patients, including those with SMI; (2) examine utilization outcomes (ie, Thrive referral, readmission, emergency department [ED], primary, and specialty care visits) for Medicaid-insured individuals with and without SMI who receive Thrive compared with usual care; and (3) evaluate the acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and cost-benefit of an adapted Thrive clinical pathway that is tailored for Medicaid-insured patients with co-occurring SMI., Methods: This study will use a prospective, type I hybrid effectiveness-implementation, stepped-wedge, cluster randomized controlled trial design. We will randomize the initiation of Thrive referrals at the unit level. Data collection will occur over 24 months. Inclusion criteria for Thrive referral include individuals who (1) are Medicaid insured, dually enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare, or Medicaid eligible; (2) reside in Philadelphia; (3) are admitted for a medical diagnosis for over 24 hours at the study hospital; (4) are planned for discharge to home; (5) agree to receive home care services; and (6) are aged ≥18 years. Primary analyses will use a mixed-effects negative binomial regression model to evaluate readmission and ED utilization, comparing those with and without SMI who receive Thrive to those with and without SMI who receive usual care. Using a convergent parallel mixed methods design, analyses will be conducted simultaneously for the survey and interview data of patients, clinicians, and health care system leaders. The cost of Thrive will be calculated from budget monitoring data for the research budget, the cost of staff time, and average Medicaid facility fee payments., Results: This research project was funded in October 2023. Data collection will occur from April 2024 through December 2025. Results are anticipated to be published in 2025-2027., Conclusions: We anticipate that patients with and without co-occurring SMI will benefit from the adapted Thrive clinical pathway. We also anticipate the adapted version of Thrive to be deemed feasible, acceptable, and appropriate by patients, clinicians, and health system leaders., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06203509; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT06203509., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/64575., (©J Margo Brooks Carthon, Heather Brom, Kelvin Eyram Amenyedor, Michael O Harhay, Marsha Grantham-Murillo, Jacqueline Nikpour, Karen B Lasater, Daniela Golinelli, Pamela Z Cacchione, Amanda P Bettencourt. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 12.11.2024.)

COVID-19 mortality disparities for socially vulnerable patients, including individuals facing higher levels of poverty, housing insecurity, and limited transportation, have been linked to the quality of hospitals where they received care. Few studies have examined the specific aspects of hospitals, such as nursing care quality, that may underlie disparate outcomes. Recent studies suggest that nursing resources in the pre-pandemic period were associated with mortality during the COVID-19 public health emergency. In this study, we examined the association between social vulnerability, the nurse work environment, and inpatient mortality among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with COVID-19. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of linked survey data collected from nurses working in New York and Illinois, Medicare claims, American Hospital Association Annual Survey data, and the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). Higher mortality rates were observed among patients in the highest quartile of social vulnerability compared to the lowest (6870 [25.8%] vs 5019 [19.1%]; P < .001). Using multivariable regression modeling, a statistically significant interaction was found between the highest SVI quartile and the nurse work environment (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.98; P < .05), implying that the effect of a higher quality nurse work environment on mortality was decidedly greater for patients in the highest quartile (odds ratio = 0.86 × 0.94 = 0.80) compared to patients in the lowest quartile (OR, 0.94). Post-hoc analyses demonstrated that hundreds of COVID-19 related deaths among the most socially vulnerable patients may have been avoided if all hospitals had a high-quality nurse work environment. Strengthening the quality of nurse work environments may help to reduce health disparities and should be considered in public health emergency planning, specifically in hospitals serving socially vulnerable communities., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Abstract: The field of HIV research has grown over the past 40 years, but there remains an urgent need to address challenges that cisgender women living in the United States experience in the HIV neutral status care continuum, particularly among women such as Black women, who continue to be disproportionately burdened by HIV due to multiple levels of systemic oppression. We used a social ecological framework to provide a detailed review of the risk factors that drive the women's HIV epidemic. By presenting examples of effective approaches, best clinical practices, and identifying existing research gaps in three major categories (behavioral, biomedical, and structural), we provide an overview of the current state of research on HIV prevention among women. To illustrate a nursing viewpoint and take into account the diverse life experiences of women, we provide guidance to strengthen current HIV prevention programs. Future research should examine combined approaches for HIV prevention, and policies should be tailored to ensure that women receive effective services that are evidence-based and which they perceive as important to their lives., (Copyright © 2021 Association of Nurses in AIDS Care.)