Search

Productive scholarly writing is important for succeeding in graduate nursing programs such as thesis-and practice-based master's or doctoral degrees. Nurses pursuing graduate-level programs are expected to produce high-level scholarly writing manuscripts. However, writing typically is an independent and isolating endeavor. This article describes a student-led writing group (“Sit Down & Write!”) that was adapted from the “Shut Up & Write!” (SUAW) structure. Five strategies were incorporated to meet the unique needs of graduate nursing students and foster productivity: (a) provide space for diverse groups of nursing students to participate, (b) offer flexible scheduling, (c) accommodate a flexible group structure, (d) host longer sessions, and (e) allow time to discuss writing goals. Overall, Sit Down and Write! provided a community of productive writing support. Future adaptations may consider providing a virtual option so sessions are accessible to students who are unable to join in-person. [ J Contin Educ Nurs . 2021;52(7):313–318.]

To provide an overview and synthesis of the current evidence on healthcare aides' involvement in team decision-making in long-term care.Healthcare aides provide the most direct care to residents in long-term care homes and are uniquely positioned to influence the quality of care. Yet, they are not typically included in team decisions for improving resident care. As demand for long-term care increases, it is essential that we have a comprehensive understanding of ways to support healthcare aides' role on the interprofessional team for decision-making about resident care.Narrative review.Five electronic databases were searched for articles published in English between 2008 and 2020. Thematic analysis was conducted to synthesise findings using an organising framework. Reporting followed the PRISMA-ScR.Twelve studies were included. Results indicate that work environment factors that influenced (supported or hindered) healthcare aides' involvement in decision-making included information access/availability, hierarchical staffing structures and supervisor support/shared governance. Relational processes that influenced team decision-making included team communication and collaboration, information sharing and exchange, and the quality of work relationships among team members. Strategies are discussed that could address the identified barriers and support healthcare aides' active involvement in team decisions regarding resident care.This review highlights the pervasive underutilization of healthcare aides, who have the most knowledge of residents to support person-centred care. There remains a paucity of research on healthcare aides' involvement in team decision-making. Research is needed to examine the effectiveness of interventions to support healthcare aides' participation in decision-making and the impact on staff and resident outcomes.It is crucial that healthcare aides are afforded opportunities to be part of the interprofessional team for information sharing and decision-making for resident care. Managers play a key role in supporting healthcare aides' inclusion in decision-making.

Interprofessional care teams can play a key role in supporting older adults (and caregivers) in making informed health decisions, yet shared decision making is not widely practiced in home care. Based on an earlier needs assessment with older adults (and caregivers) with home care experience, we aimed to explore the perceptions of home care teams on the decisions facing their clients and their perceived involvement in shared decision making. A cross-sectional study was conducted with 614 home care providers (nurses, personal support workers, rehabilitation professionals) in three Canadian provinces (Quebec, Ontario, and Alberta). Home care providers considered the decision "to stay at home or move" as the most difficult for older adults. Those most frequently involved in decision making with older adults were family members and least involved were physicians. Although all home care providers reported high levels of shared decision-making, we detected an effect of respondent's discipline on self-perceived shared decision-making; nurses and rehabilitation professionals reported significantly higher levels of shared decision making than personal support workers. A more tailored approach is required to support shared decision making in interprofessional care teams.

Productive scholarly writing is important for succeeding in graduate nursing programs such as thesis-and practice-based master's or doctoral degrees. Nurses pursuing graduate-level programs are expected to produce high-level scholarly writing manuscripts. However, writing typically is an independent and isolating endeavor. This article describes a student-led writing group ("Sit DownWrite!") that was adapted from the "Shut UpWrite!" (SUAW) structure. Five strategies were incorporated to meet the unique needs of graduate nursing students and foster productivity: (a) provide space for diverse groups of nursing students to participate, (b) offer flexible scheduling, (c) accommodate a flexible group structure, (d) host longer sessions, and (e) allow time to discuss writing goals. Overall, Sit Down and Write! provided a community of productive writing support. Future adaptations may consider providing a virtual option so sessions are accessible to students who are unable to join in-person.

Introduction Older adults with cancer are at increased risk of delirium due to age, comorbidities, medications, cognitive impairment, and possibly cancer treatments. However, there is scant information on the risks of delirium with chemotherapy and approaches to prevent or treat it. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize available evidence. Materials and Methods We systematically searched peer-reviewed journal articles in English, French, German, and Dutch from five databases from 1990 to May 2019 to identify studies examining delirium in adult patients receiving chemotherapy. We also attempted to identify delirium risk prediction models and prevention or treatment trials. All reviews and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Summary estimates were derived from random effects models. Results A total of 23,389 titles and abstracts were screened, and 1272 full-text articles were reviewed. Nineteen articles reported on delirium using an acceptable diagnostic standard. Sample sizes varied from 7 to 324. The incidence of delirium ranged from 0 to 51% (weighted mean 9%, 95% confidence interval 5–16%). In a sensitivity analysis including 122 studies that used terminology suggestive of delirium but did not meet our inclusion criteria, the weighted incidence of delirium was 10% (95% confidence interval 8–12%). Age was not consistently associated with increased delirium risk. No intervention studies to prevent or treat delirium were identified. Conclusions Delirium may occur in 1 in 11 older adults receiving chemotherapy; however, there were substantial limitations in reported studies. This systemic review highlights key gaps in knowledge, particularly regarding risk factors, prevention, and treatments.

e23025 Background: Older adults with cancer are at increased risk of delirium given their advanced age, multiple comorbidities and medications, prevalence of cognitive impairment, and possibly cancer treatment. Awareness of such risks and interventions to prevent or treat delirium is important to clinicians and to provide high quality care. However, there is scant published information on the risks of delirium with chemotherapy or evidence-based approaches to prevent or treat it. We performed a scoping review to summarize the available evidence. Methods: We conducted a scoping review using the framework of Arksey and O’Malley. We systematically searched peer-reviewed journal articles in English, French, and German from Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL Plus, and Cochrane Central from inception until January 2017 to identify studies that examined delirium in patients receiving chemotherapy. We also attempted to identify any studies that reported on multivariable delirium risk prediction models and any clinical trials that examined prevention or treatment of delirium. Article titles and abstracts as well as full text articles were reviewed using Covidence software by two or more reviewers independently. Similarly, data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. Results: A total of 21,678 titles and abstracts were screened, and 1,166 full-text articles were reviewed. Nineteen articles with varying study designs (retrospective administrative databases to clinical trials) reported on delirium using an acceptable diagnostic standard. Sample sizes varied from 15 to over 21,000. No one tumour site or treatment protocol constituted the majority of studies. The incidence of delirium ranged from 0 to 51% (mean 13.5%). The time course of delirium relative to the cycle of chemotherapy was inconsistently reported. No studies reported on risk prediction models for delirium, and no intervention studies to prevent or treat delirium were identified. An additional 109 studies reported on outcomes that could be part of the delirium syndrome but did not meet even our broad inclusion criteria (e.g. cognitive disturbance). Conclusions: Delirium may occur in over 1 in 8 older adults receiving chemotherapy, although there were substantial limitations in reported studies. This scoping review highlights the dearth of knowledge in the area, particularly for risk factors, prevention, and treatment, and emphasizes the need for high-quality studies examining these important outcomes in the oncology setting.

Two-color whole blood lysis is the assay of choice for lymphocyte immunophenotyping because of the additional information it provides. Recently, artifactual double-staining of some specimens has been observed with this assay. In these cases, the samples appear to be uncompensated for spectral overlap or to inappropriately coexpress two antigens simultaneously. This artifact can result in the apparent coexpression of CD4 and CD8 (observed in lymphoblastic processes) or of CD5 and CD20 (characteristic of chronic lymphocytic leukemia) in normal persons, leading to an erroneous diagnosis. Using plasma, serum, or immunoglobulin preparations from donors who exhibit this artifact we sought to determine 1) the source of the artifact and 2) ways to overcome it. This staining is apparently due to an immunoglobulin in the donors' serum and plasma which does not have specific reactivity with mouse immunoglobulin. Washing whole blood samples or blocking with mouse immunoglobulin is a convenient way of avoiding this artifact. © 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.