Search

Introduction There are limited data regarding the international travel history and preparation, as well as glycaemic control practices, risk behaviours and experiences of people with type 1 diabetes during travel. Our review aimed to address the research question: 'What are the health practices, behaviours and experiences of people with type 1 diabetes when travelling?' Methods We conducted a mixed-methods narrative review using adapted review methods from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and standards developed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. MEDLINE, Scopus, PubMed and CINAHL, and the reference lists of all eligible studies were searched. Results Nine records comprising of 11 studies were included, with data heralding from various countries, published between 1990 and 2022. We identified three main themes: travel preparation (type of travel, planning and advice seeking); issues related to air travel (airports and airport security, hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia, and insulin) and general travel-related issues (illness and medical treatment, type 1 diabetes management, and major concerns and barriers). Conclusions Our findings highlighted the lack of quality data regarding type 1 diabetes and travel within the extant literature, as well a pressing need for empirical studies to be undertaken and consensus guidelines developed to improve the travel experiences of people with type 1 diabetes. Unless change is made, people with type 1 diabetes will continue to experience preventable risk and harm while travelling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Type 1 and 2 diabetes care, especially within primary health‐care settings, has traditionally involved doctor‐led clinics. However, with increasing chronic disease burden, there is scope for nurses to expand their role in assisting diabetes self‐management. Aims: This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of nurse‐led care in reducing glycated haemoglobin in adults with Type 1 or 2 diabetes. Methods: Methodology from the Joanna Briggs Institute Method for Systematic Review Research and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, including identifying publications, assessing study quality, summarizing evidence and interpreting findings. The search strategy involved using the Medical Subject Headings and keyword variations when searching MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, PubMed and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases. Inclusion criteria were samples with Type 1 or 2 diabetes, mean age of ≥18 years, English language studies and publication date of January 2011–December 2021. Results: Overall, 34 articles from 16 countries met inclusion criteria. Though not always clinically significant, results indicated that nurse‐led care had beneficial impacts on glycated haemoglobin values, with reductions from 0.03% to 2.0%. This was evident when nurses received formal training, used treatment algorithms, had limited medical support, utilized technology and offered defined culturally sensitive and appropriate diabetes care. Conclusions: Findings support nurse‐led Type 1 and 2 diabetes care. Although further research is required, changes may necessitate increased recognition of nurse‐led care and funding. Nurse‐led care models should differ according to health‐care settings. Summary statement: What is already known about this topic? Diabetes is the world's fastest growing chronic condition and is widely recognized as a leading global challenge to the health and well‐being of individuals, families and societies.What this paper adds? Findings highlight the effectiveness of nurse‐led care in reducing glycated haemoglobin values in patients with Type 1 or 2 diabetes. This was evident when nurses received formal training, used treatment algorithms, had limited medical support, utilized technology and offered defined culturally sensitive and appropriate diabetes care. The implications of this paper: There is scope for nurses to expand their role and assist diabetes self‐management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation in non‐critical care hospital wards is a stressful event for the registered nurse; stress may negatively affect performance. Delays in initiating basic life support and following current basic life support algorithms have been reported globally. Aim: The aim of this review was to investigate factors that can affect registered nurses' experiences of performing basic life support. Methods: Using the five‐step integrative literature review method from Whittemore and Knafl, this review searched articles published between January 2000 and June 2022 for qualitative and quantitative primary studies from the databases CINAHL Complete (EBSCO), Medline (Web of Science), Scopus and PubMed. Results: Nine studies from eight countries met the inclusion criteria and were appraised here. Five themes relating to factors affecting the performance of basic life support were found during this review: staff interaction issues, confidence concerns, fear of harm and potential litigation, defibrillation concerns and basic life support training issues. Conclusions: This review revealed several concerns experienced by registered nurses in performing basic life support and highlights a lack of research. Factors affecting nurses' experiences need to be understood. This will allow education to focus on consideration of human factors, or non‐technical skills during basic life support training, as well as technical skills, to improve outcomes for patients experiencing an in‐hospital cardiopulmonary arrest. Summary statement: What is already known about this topic? In‐hospital basic life support is not always performed at expected levels.There is very little information on factors affecting registered nurses' experiences in performing basic life support, especially in non‐critical areas.Although human factors, such as teamwork, have recently been added to cardiopulmonary resuscitation education, these are poorly understood regarding ward nurses' real‐life experiences. What this paper adds? Factors impacting registered nurses' performance of basic life support in non‐critical care wards included staff interaction issues, confidence concerns, fear of harm and potential litigation, defibrillation concerns and basic life support training issues. The implications of this paper: Factors affecting nurses in performing basic life support need to be understood in order to improve performance.The identification of barriers from the literature allows educators to include targeted discussion and education within basic life support training to improve patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: This integrative review aimed to draw conclusions from evidence on how registered nurses are measuring respiratory rates for acute care patients. Background: Despite the growing research supporting respiratory rate as an early indicator for clinical deterioration, respiratory rate has consistently been the least frequently measured and accurately documented vital sign. Design: An integrative review. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in June 2022 in four databases: CINAHL, PubMed, Medline and Scopus. Quality appraisal was undertaken using the Joanna Briggs Institute's Checklist. PRISMA guidelines were followed to ensure explicit reporting and reported in the PRISMA checklist. Results: Overall, 9915 records were identified, and 19 met the inclusion criteria. Of these 19 articles, seven themes emerged: estimation and digit preference, lack of understanding and knowledge, not valuing the clinical significance of respiratory rate, oxygen saturation substitute, interobserver agreement, subjective concern and count duration. A high prevalence of bias, estimation and incorrect technique was evident. A total of 15 articles reported specifically on how registered nurses are measuring respiratory rates on general medical and surgical wards. Conclusions: Despite its importance, this integrative review has determined that respiratory rates are not being assessed correctly by nursing staff in the acute care environment. Evidence of using estimation, value bias or quick count and multiply techniques are emerging themes which urgently require further research. No patient or public contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]