Search

Management of critically ill patients is changing due a rise in population age, comorbidity and complexity. To accommodate these changes, the demand is increasing for advanced practice nurses. More knowledge is needed regarding the role of advanced practice critical care nurses in European countries. The aim of the study was to review the literature describing skills and competencies required for advanced practice critical care nursing in Europe and to investigate related policy. We performed a scoping review including papers published in 1992–2019 targeting policy and the intersection of advanced practice nursing (level of practice), critical care nursing (specialty area) and Europe (geographical origin). Main sources of evidence were PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, SweMed+, Scopus, ERIC and Social Sciences Citation Index. We also searched grey literature, webpages, reference lists and performed hand-search. The search identified 11,478 papers/references of which 42 were included. Four levels of practice were identified with unclear boundaries: professional nurse, specialized nurse, advanced practice nurse and advanced critical care practitioner (nurse or other). Most skills and competencies described in the literature were generic to advanced practice and only few were area specific to critical care. Advanced practice critical care nurses were often unable to fulfil their role because education, supportive policy and legislation were lacking. This scoping review informs the policy makers and the INACTIC study of existing advanced practice in critical care nursing in Europe. The advanced role in critical care nursing is characterized by inconsistency regarding policy, education, titles, roles, scope of practice, skills and competencies. Levels of practice and areas of specialization need to be clarified. Most skills and competencies identified were generic for advanced practice nursing and many were generic for any profession. Task-shifting from physician to nurse needs to be more clearly defined and patient outcomes described. Given the scarcity of papers in our target area, we believe it might be too early to conduct a systematic review at this time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relationship between adverse individual socio-economic circumstances and suicidal behaviour is well established. However, the impact of adverse collective circumstances – such as the socio-economic context where people live - is less well understood. This systematic review explores the extent to which area-level socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with inequalities in suicidal behaviour and self-harm in Europe. We performed a systematic review (in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EconLit and Social Sciences Citation Index) from 2005 to 2015. Observational studies were included if they were based in Europe and had a primary suicidal behaviour and self-harm outcome, compared at least two areas, included an area-level measure of socio-economic disadvantage and were published in the English language. The review followed The Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for quality appraisal. We identified 27 studies (30 papers) from 14 different European countries. There was a significant association (in 25/27 studies, all of which were rated as of medium or high quality) between socioeconomic disadvantage and suicidal behaviour (and self-harm), particularly for men, and this was a consistent finding across a variety of European countries. Socio-economic disadvantage was found to have an independent effect in several studies whilst others found evidence of mediating contextual and compositional factors. There is strong evidence of an association between suicidal behaviours (and self-harm) and area-level socio-economic disadvantage in Europe, particularly for men. Suicide prevention strategies should take this into account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]