Search

Background: Healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) are common in long-term care facilities (LTCF) and cause significant burden. Infection prevention and control (IPC) measures include the clinical best practices (CBP) of hand hygiene, hygiene and sanitation, screening, and basic and additional precautions. Few studies demonstrate their cost-effectiveness in LTCF, and those that do, largely focus on one CBP. An overarching synthesis of IPC economic analyses in this context is warranted. The aim of this paper is to conduct a systematic review of economic evaluations of CBP applied in LTCF., Methods: We twice queried CINAHL, Cochrane, EconLit, Embase, Medline, Web of Science and Scopus for studies published in the last three decades of economic evaluations of CBP in LTCF. We included controlled and randomized clinical trials, cohort, longitudinal, follow-up, prospective, retrospective, cross-sectional, and simulations studies, as well as those based on mathematical or statistical modelling. Two reviewers conducted study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment of studies. We applied discounting rates of 3%, 5% and 8%, and presented all costs in 2022 Canadian dollars. The protocol of this review was registered with Research Registry (reviewregistry1210) and published in BMC Systematic Reviews., Findings: We found 3,331 records and then 822 records; ten studies were retained. The economic analyses described were cost-minimization (n = 1), cost-benefit (n = 1), cost-savings (n = 2), cost-utility (n = 2) and cost-effectiveness which included cost-utility and cost-benefit analyses (n = 4). Four studies were high quality, three were moderate, and three were low quality. Inter-rater agreement for quality assessment was 91⋅7%. All studies (n = 10) demonstrated that CBP associated with IPC are clinically effective in LTCF and many (n = 6) demonstrated their cost effectiveness., Interpretation: Ongoing economic evaluation research of IPC remains essential to underpin healthcare policy choices guided by empirical evidence for LTCF residents and staff., Competing Interests: Declarations. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc on long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Some LTCFs performed better than others at slowing COVID-19 transmission. Emerging literature has mostly described infection prevention and control strategies implemented by LTCFs during the pandemic. However, there is a need for a comprehensive review of factors that influenced the performance of LTCFs in containing COVID-19 spread to inform public health policy., Objective: To build on the existing literature, we conducted a scoping review of factors that influenced LTCF performance during the COVID-19 pandemic using a multidimensional conceptual framework of performance., Methods: We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews. We queried CINAHL, MEDLINE (Ovid), CAIRN, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed literature in English or French published between January 1 st , 2020 and December 31 st , 2021. Retrieved records were screened for context (COVID-19 pandemic), population (LTCFs), interest (internal and external factors that influenced LTCF performance), and outcomes (dimensions of performance: equity, accessibility, reactivity, safety, continuity, efficacy, viability, efficiency). Descriptive characteristics of included articles were summarized. Dimensions of performance as well as internal (e.g., facility characteristics) and external (e.g., visitors) factors identified to have influenced LTCF performance were presented., Results: We retained 140 articles of which 68% were classified as research articles, 47% originated in North America, and most covered a period between March and July 2020. The most frequent dimensions of performance were "efficacy" (75.7%) and "safety" (75.7%). The most common internal factors were "organizational context" (72.9%) and "human resources" (62.1%), and the most common external factors were "visitors" (27.1%) and "public health guidelines" (25.7%)., Conclusions: Our review contributes to a global interest in understanding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vulnerable populations residing and working in LTCFs. Though a myriad of factors were reported, a lack of randomized controlled trials makes it impossible to establish causality between the identified factors and LTCF performance. The use of a multidimensional framework can be recommended to evaluate healthcare system performance not merely in terms of efficacy and safety, but alongside other critical dimensions such as efficiency and equity., Trial Registration: Research Registry ID: researchregistry7026., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aim: To develop a standardized training for charge nurses., Design: A developmental research design divided into three parts will be undertaken., Methods: (1) A scoping review will be used to develop standardized training focusing on charge nurse skills and sub-skills; (2) a Delphi review with nurses, managers and researchers will validate the content of the training; content validity will be assessed over sufficient rounds of review to obtain a content validity index of over 0.7 and (3) a cross-sectional study will pilot test the training with 30 charge nurses., Results: This study will describe the development of updated and empirically validated training to be systematically implemented in healthcare institutions and offered to charge nurses when they begin., (© 2023 The Authors. Nursing Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: The charge nurse (CN) holds a position in clinical-administrative management and is essential for improving the quality and safety of care in healthcare institutions. The position requires five essential skills: leadership; interpersonal communication; clinical-administrative caring; problem solving; and knowledge and understanding of the work environment. The scientific literature has not widely examined the importance of providing these skills as part of initial training, nor when CNs begin their duties. This study aims to fill this gap through an exhaustive review of the literature with the aim of developing standardised training for the CN when they start in their position., Methods and Analysis: A scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework will be conducted. The CINAHL, MEDLINE, Science Direct and Cairn, databases as well as grey literature from ProQuest dissertations and thesis global database, Google Scholar and the website of the Order of Nurses of Quebec will be queried using keywords. Relevant literature in French and English, published between 2000 and 2022 will be retained. The CN is the target population. Outcomes address at least one of the five CN skills, describe how they are operationalised and what their impact is on the organisation of work and quality of care. This analysis will identify essential and relevant elements for the development of standardised, up-to-date and appropriate training for the position of CN., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval is not required, as data does not include individual patient data. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and presented to nursing managers and directors., Scoping Review Registration: Research Registry ID: researchregistry7030., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Given the high risk of contracting a healthcare-associated infection in long-term care facilities, infection prevention and control are essential for the quality of care and safety of residents and staff. To develop more effective infection prevention and control interventions in long-term care facilities, it is important to assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of existing interventions. There are only a few reviews on this subject, but these are not recent and most do not perform an economic evaluation. Moreover, none uses a discounting approach which limits inter-study comparison. To address these gaps, we will conduct a systematic review of economic evaluations related to healthcare-associated infection prevention and control in long-term care facilities using a discounting approach., Methods: We will query MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL, EconLit, JSTOR, and Scopus, as well as the gray literature databases CORDIS and ProQuest. We will include quantitative studies that evaluate four clinical best practices associated with infection prevention and control (hand hygiene, hygiene and sanitation, screening, basic, and additional precautions) and use at least one of five economic analyses (cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, cost-minimization, cost-utility, cost-consequences). Primary outcomes will include net cost savings, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year, and incremental cost per disability-adjusted life year. Two co-authors will independently screen and select articles, extract data, and assess the quality of selected articles using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria, the Economic Evaluation criteria, and the Cochrane criteria for economic evaluation. Extracted data will be synthesized, and values will be adjusted to 2022 Canadian dollars using the discount rates of 3%, 5%, and 8%., Discussion: Information obtained through this systematic review may help researchers and policy makers make more efficient use of limited healthcare resources to ensure the safety and quality of long-term care., Systematic Review Registration: Research registry ID: reviewregistry1210., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) have been severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic with serious consequences for the residents. Some LTCFs performed better than others, experiencing lower case and death rates due to COVID-19. A comprehensive understanding of the factors that have affected the transmission of COVID-19 in LTCFs is lacking, as no published studies have applied a multidimensional conceptual framework to evaluate the performance of LTCFs during the pandemic. Much research has focused on infection prevention and control strategies or specific disease outcomes (e.g., death rates). To address these gaps, our scoping review will identify and analyze the performance factors that have influenced the management of COVID-19 in LTCFs by adopting a multidimensional conceptual framework., Methods: We will query the CINAHL, MEDLINE (Ovid), CAIRN, Science Direct, and Web of Science databases for peer-reviewed articles written in English or French and published between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. We will include articles that focus on the specified context (COVID-19), population (LTCFs), interest (facilitators and barriers to performance of LTCFs), and outcomes (dimensions of performance according to a modified version of the Ministère de la santé et des services sociaux du Québec conceptual framework). Each article will be screened by at least two co-authors independently followed by data extraction of the included articles by one co-author and a review by the principal investigator., Results: We will present the results both narratively and with visual aids (e.g., flowcharts, tables, conceptual maps)., Discussion: Our scoping review will provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors that have affected the performance of LTCFs during the COVID-19 pandemic. This knowledge can help inform the development of more effective infection prevention and control measures for future pandemics and outbreaks. The results of our review may lead to improvements in the care and safety of LTCF residents and staff. SCOPING REVIEW REGISTRATION: Research Registry researchregistry7026., (© 2022. The Author(s).)