Search

Background: Experience‐Based Co‐Design (EBCD) is a multi‐stage participatory action research process which was developed originally to increase patient involvement in service improvement initiatives. This viewpoint article serves as a reflection on the researchers' experiences, focusing on the application and feasibility of participatory approaches, particularly co‐design, in the specific context of early‐phase clinical trials. Methods: We reflect on the opportunities and challenges of applying EBCD in a new context of early‐phase clinical trials in oncology where experimental treatments are increasingly perceived as a therapeutic option and, in certain instances, their efficacy may lead to accelerated approval facilitating a swifter integration into standard care. Results: We propose that the opportunity of applying EBCD in such trials lies in improving the delivery of person‐centered care, care coordination, and support during the transition from experimental to standard care. Three potential challenges when applying EBCD in early‐phase clinical trials are discussed related to: the need for standardization in trial processes; planning EBCD in a context of high uncertainty; and vulnerability of patient populations. Conclusion: Integrating EBCD into early‐phase oncology trials presents an opportunity to enhance person‐centered care and can lead to simultaneous improvements in care processes and therapeutic development. Patient or Public Contribution: This article has been developed with the collaboration of a patient partner who serves on the advisory board of our ongoing EBCD study in early clinical trials. [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]

A career ladder for nurses, including several levels of nursing practice and specific roles for advanced practice nurses, was introduced in Hong Kong around the start of the 21st century. To date no studies have distinguished the practices of advanced practice nurses in Hong Kong. This cross‐sectional study, conducted between November 2020 and March 2021, aims to identify and differentiate the practice patterns of advanced practice nurses by utilizing the Advanced Practice Role Delineation tool. A total of 191 responses were obtained. Three roles were identified: nurse consultant, advanced practice nurse, and advanced practice nurse in management. Among the five advanced practice nursing domains, nurses were most frequently involved in Education and in Direct Comprehensive Care activities, while least active in Research and in Publication and Professional Leadership. Identifying activities in various nursing roles helps to differentiate their responsibilities and provides new insights for role utilization and support. Although the role characteristics are shaped by country contexts, research evidence on practice patterns may be used to support international discussion and efforts to promote role clarity and effective role introduction and optimization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To examine the exemplary practice of nurse consultants (NCs) and derive a model to illustrate the highest level of advanced nursing practice. Design A descriptive study was conducted to examine the practice and outcomes of seven NC roles in varied clinical specialties in Hong Kong. Exemplary practice was examined in relation to competencies for advanced practice nursing in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom. Methods Data about NC characteristics and their practices were collected using a structured questionnaire and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Health service documents and clinical notes were analyzed using the framework approach. Findings All NCs demonstrated the competence expected of an advanced practice nurse with impacts on patients, nursing profession, and the organization as identified in the advanced nursing practice framework in Hong Kong. NCs also performed at the highest level of practice delineated by Skills for Health in the United Kingdom. They were involved in diagnostic and therapeutic practice, and identified patient satisfaction and symptom management as key outcomes. Conclusions This study provides new insight into levels of advanced practice and illustrates the exemplary work of NCs to demonstrate how they have developed and shaped services to bring about positive patient and organizational outcomes. Career laddering that places NCs at the highest level of advanced practice is important for making the best use of nursing expertise to achieve optimal patient and organizational outcomes. Clinical Relevance This study addresses a knowledge gap to enrich our current understanding of the impact of advanced practice nursing roles by linking NC role practices and competencies to key outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale Clinical practice is the primary focus of advanced practice nursing (APN) roles. However, with unprecedented needs for health care reform and quality improvement (QI), health care administrators are seeking new ways to utilize all dimensions of APN expertise, especially related to research and evidence-based practice. International studies reveal research as the most underdeveloped and underutilized aspect of these roles. Aims To improve patient care by strengthening the capacity of advanced practice nurses to integrate research and evidence-based practice activities into their day-to-day practice. Methods An academic-practice partnership was created among hospital-based advanced practice nurses, nurse administrators, and APN researchers to create an innovative approach to educate and mentor advanced practice nurses in conducting point-of-care research, QI, or evidence-based practice projects to improve patient, provider, and/or system outcomes. A practice-based research course was delivered to 2 cohorts of advanced practice nurses using a range of teaching strategies including 1-to-1 academic mentorship. All participants completed self-report surveys before and after course delivery. Results Through participation in this initiative, advanced practice nurses enhanced their knowledge, skills, and confidence in the design, implementation, and/or evaluation of research, QI, and evidence-based practice activities. Conclusion Evaluation of this initiative provides evidence of the acceptability and feasibility of academic-practice partnerships to educate and mentor point-of-care providers on how to lead, implement, and integrate research, QI and evidence-based activities into their practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To address the gap in evidence-based information required to support the development of advanced practice nursing (APN) roles in Switzerland, stakeholders identified the need for guidance to generate strategic evaluation data. This article describes an evaluation framework developed to inform decisions about the effective utilization of APN roles across the country. Approach A participatory approach was used by an international group of stakeholders. Published literature and an evidenced-based framework for introducing APN roles were analyzed and applied to define the purpose, target audiences, and essential elements of the evaluation framework. Through subsequent meetings and review by an expert panel, the framework was developed and refined. Findings A framework to evaluate different types of APN roles as they evolve to meet dynamic population health, practice setting, and health system needs was created. It includes a matrix of key concepts to guide evaluations across three stages of APN role development: introduction, implementation, and long-term sustainability. For each stage, evaluation objectives and questions examining APN role structures, processes, and outcomes from different perspectives (e.g., patients, providers, managers, policy-makers) were identified. Conclusions A practical, robust framework based on well-established evaluation concepts and current understanding of APN roles can be used to conduct systematic evaluations. Clinical Relevance The evaluation framework is sufficiently generic to allow application in developed countries globally, both for evaluation as well as research purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale, aims and objectives Clinical nurse specialists ( CNSs) are major providers of transitional care. This paper describes a systematic review of randomized controlled trials ( RCTs) evaluating the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CNS transitional care. Methods We searched 10 electronic databases, 1980 to July 2013, and hand-searched reference lists and key journals for RCTs that evaluated health system outcomes of CNS transitional care. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias and Quality of Health Economic Studies tools. The quality of evidence for individual outcomes was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation ( GRADE) tool. We pooled data for similar outcomes. Results Thirteen RCTs of CNS transitional care were identified ( n = 2463 participants). The studies had low ( n = 3), moderate ( n = 8) and high ( n = 2) risk of bias and weak economic analyses. Post-cancer surgery, CNS care was superior in reducing patient mortality. For patients with heart failure, CNS care delayed time to and reduced death or re-hospitalization, improved treatment adherence and patient satisfaction, and reduced costs and length of re-hospitalization stay. For elderly patients and caregivers, CNS care improved caregiver depression and reduced re-hospitalization, re-hospitalization length of stay and costs. For high-risk pregnant women and very low birthweight infants, CNS care improved infant immunization rates and maternal satisfaction with care and reduced maternal and infant length of hospital stay and costs. Conclusions There is low-quality evidence that CNS transitional care improves patient health outcomes, delays re-hospitalization and reduces hospital length of stay, re-hospitalization rates and costs. Further research incorporating robust economic evaluation is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale, aims and objectives Increasing numbers of clinical nurse specialists ( CNSs) are working in outpatient settings. The objective of this paper is to describe a systematic review of randomized controlled trials ( RCTs) evaluating the cost-effectiveness of CNSs delivering outpatient care in alternative or complementary provider roles. Methods We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and seven other electronic databases, 1980 to July 2012 and hand-searched bibliographies and key journals. RCTs that evaluated formally trained CNSs and health system outcomes were included. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to assess quality of evidence for individual outcomes. Results Eleven RCTs, four evaluating alternative provider ( n = 683 participants) and seven evaluating complementary provider roles ( n = 1464 participants), were identified. Results of the alternative provider RCTs (low-to-moderate quality evidence) were fairly consistent across study populations with similar patient outcomes to usual care, some evidence of reduced resource use and costs, and two economic analyses (one fair and one high quality) favouring CNS care. Results of the complementary provider RCTs (low-to-moderate quality evidence) were also fairly consistent across study populations with similar or improved patient outcomes and mostly similar health system outcomes when compared with usual care; however, the economic analyses were weak. Conclusions Low-to-moderate quality evidence supports the effectiveness and two fair-to-high quality economic analyses support the cost-effectiveness of outpatient alternative provider CNSs. Low-to-moderate quality evidence supports the effectiveness of outpatient complementary provider CNSs; however, robust economic evaluations are needed to address cost-effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]