Search

This qualitative study aims to explore the perspectives of nursing students regarding the application and integration of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in their studies. With the increasing prevalence of generative AI tools in academic settings, there is a growing interest in their use among students for learning and assessments. Employing a qualitative descriptive design, this study used semi-structured interviews with nursing students to capture the nuanced insights of the participants. Semi-structured interviews were digitally recorded and then transcribed verbatim. The research team reviewed all the data independently and then convened to discuss and reach a consensus on the identified themes. This study was conducted within the discipline of nursing at a regional Australian university. Thirteen nursing students, from both first and second year of the programme, were interviewed as part of this study. Six distinct themes emerged from the data analysis, including the educational impact of AI tools, equitable learning environment, ethical considerations of AI use, technology integration, safe and practical utility and generational differences. This initial exploration sheds light on the diverse perspectives of nursing students concerning the incorporation of generative AI tools in their education. It underscores the potential for both positive contributions and challenges associated with the integration of generative AI in nursing education and practice. • There is a lack of understanding on how generative AI can positively be used. • There is a benefit to using generative AI for non-face-to-face nursing tasks. • If used ethically generative AI will benefit students. • Nursing degrees lose value if generative AI is used unethically. • The nuances of face-to-face nursing is not replicable by generative AI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To explore the relationship between timing of continuous renal replacement therapy commencement and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality at 28 and 90 days., Design: Nested observational cohort study using data from the Randomized Evaluation of Normal Versus Augmented Level Replacement Therapy Study., Setting: Twenty-three ICUs in Australia and New Zealand., Patients: Four hundred thirty-nine critically ill patients with acute kidney injury Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, End-stage kidney disease-injury (RIFLE-I) criteria., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: The time between RIFLE-I acute kidney injury and randomization in the Randomized Evaluation of Normal Versus Augmented Level Replacement Therapy Study (proxy for continuous renal replacement therapy commencement) was the variable of interest. All baseline variables in the Randomized Evaluation of Normal Versus Augmented Level Replacement Therapy Study were assessed. Multivariable Cox, logistic, and linear regression models were used to assess the independent relationship of time of onset of RIFLE-I acute kidney injury and randomization and patient outcomes. The median time between RIFLE-I acute kidney injury and continuous renal replacement therapy commencement was 17.6 hours (interquartile range, 7.1-46 hr). Based on four groups of continuous renal replacement therapy commencement ([group 1; reference]: < 7.1, [group 2]: ≥ 7.1 to < 17.6, [group 3]: ≥ 17.6 to < 46.0, [group 4]: ≥ 46.0 hr), earlier commencement of continuous renal replacement therapy was not associated with a significantly lower risk of death at 28 days (hazard ratio for group 2: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.62-1.81; p = 0.83; hazard ratio for group 3: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.71-2.12; p = 0.46; hazard ratio for group 4: 1.33, 95% CI: 0.77-2.31; p = 0.31). Similar findings were observed for death at 90 days., Conclusions: In a subgroup of participants of the Randomized Evaluation of Normal Versus Augmented Level Replacement Therapy Study, earlier commencement of continuous renal replacement therapy relative to RIFLE-I acute kidney injury was not significantly associated with improved survival. Additional studies with larger sample sizes and broader commencement times are warranted.

Background: The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) is increasing globally and it is much more common than end-stage kidney disease. AKI is associated with high mortality and cost of hospitalisation. Studies of treatments to reduce this high mortality have used differing renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities and have not shown improvement in the short term. The reported long-term outcomes of AKI are variable and the effect of differing RRT modalities upon them is not clear. We used the prolonged follow-up of a large clinical trial to prospectively examine the long-term outcomes and effect of RRT dosing in patients with AKI., Methods and Findings: We extended the follow-up of participants in the Randomised Evaluation of Normal vs. Augmented Levels of RRT (RENAL) study from 90 days to 4 years after randomization. Primary and secondary outcomes were mortality and requirement for maintenance dialysis, respectively, assessed in 1,464 (97%) patients at a median of 43.9 months (interquartile range [IQR] 30.0-48.6 months) post randomization. A total of 468/743 (63%) and 444/721 (62%) patients died in the lower and higher intensity groups, respectively (risk ratio [RR] 1.04, 95% CI 0.96-1.12, p = 0.49). Amongst survivors to day 90, 21 of 411 (5.1%) and 23 of 399 (5.8%) in the respective groups were treated with maintenance dialysis (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.63-2.00, p = 0.69). The prevalence of albuminuria among survivors was 40% and 44%, respectively (p = 0.48). Quality of life was not different between the two treatment groups. The generalizability of these findings to other populations with AKI requires further exploration., Conclusions: Patients with AKI requiring RRT in intensive care have high long-term mortality but few require maintenance dialysis. Long-term survivors have a heavy burden of proteinuria. Increased intensity of RRT does not reduce mortality or subsequent treatment with dialysis., Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.govNCT00221013.