Search

Introduction A diagnosis of chronic illness posed a serious threat to people during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. People with chronic illnesses were faced with increased mortality and reduced access to healthcare. Self-care is the process of maintaining health and managing a chronic illness. Nurses working in specialist services provide healthcare education to people with chronic illnesses. Access to these nurses was decreased during periods of the COVID-19 virus escalation due to the reconfiguration of services and redeployment of nurses. The purpose of the research was to learn from the experiences of people with a chronic illnesses in self-care behaviors and accessing altered healthcare services to inform future practices. Design A population survey design. Methods A mixed methods survey was designed, combining validated questionnaires and scales with open-ended questions. A convenience sample was utilized via using social media platforms. Data analysis included descriptive and inferential statistics. Content analysis was used to analyze open-ended responses. Results There were 147 responses, with approximately half reporting no changes in face-to-face healthcare contact, 41% reporting decreased contacts and 12% increased contacts. Non-face-to-face contacts were reduced by almost 9%, did not change by almost 60%, while 33% indicated an increase. Participants reported mixed perceptions in contact with healthcare providers during restrictions. In the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care and the Self-Care of Chronic Illness scales, participants scored statistically lower scores than in previous studies. Participants indicated that public health restrictions negatively impacted their confidence, created challenges with re-engaging and that access to care was more difficult. Conclusion This research highlights the importance of providing continued support to people with chronic illness irrespective of other challenges to healthcare services. A structured approac, Funding Agencies|IReL

Aims This study aims to explore a proposed translational research continuum for nurse practitioners. Background Nurse practitioners are acknowledged as clinical leaders responsible for transforming health care delivery. It is important that nurse practitioners contribute to health care knowledge using scientific processes for the implementation of evidence-based practice and evaluation of outcomes of interventions for their patient groups. Evaluation This paper provides a review of translational research literature including implementation science to align nurse practitioner activities to a modified translational research framework. Key Issues A translational research framework has the potential to strengthen nursing research in the nurse practitioner role. Adapting an accepted translational research continuum for nurse practitioners places the clinical nursing leaders in an equitable research position with all health care professionals. Implications for Nursing Management The translational research continuum provides nursing management with a structure to benchmark nursing research. The continuum applies a modern research framework to support research engagement for the nurse practitioner role.

Background: Nurse Practitioners are identified as the ideal conduit to transform healthcare delivery internationally. Healthcare transformation requires the application of leadership and research skills. Current literature has limited information on NPs as leaders or researchers in the nursing profession. Objectives: Determine if Nurse Practitioners identify themselves as leaders in nursing. Identify the leadership and research activities and influencing characteristics of Nurse Practitioners in Ireland and Australia. Establish similarities in leadership and research activities between Nurse Practitioners in Ireland and Australia. To identify if there is a relationship between leadership and research activities. Design: A quantitative electronic survey. Methods: A survey instrument was developed by combining two previously validated instruments. Nurse Practitioners in Ireland or Australia that had practiced within the last five years, and members of the respective professional association were included. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the findings and explore relationships in the data. Results: 14% (n = 96) of Nurse Practitioners responded to the survey. Nurse Practitioners in Ireland and Australia identified themselves as leaders of the nursing profession. Nurse Practitioners work practices, leadership and research activities are similar in Ireland and Australia. The majority (n = 55, 57%), of participants reported being research active. There was an association between perceived leadership and research activities among participants. Conclusion: Nurse Practitioners in both Ireland and Australia identify themselves as leaders of the nursing profession. There is no difference in reported work practices, leadership or research activities of Nurse Practitioners in both Ireland and Australia. There is an association between perceived leadership and research activity. Impact Statement: Nurse Practitioners in Ireland and Australia perceived themselves as lead

Aims This study aimed to identify evidence of nurse practitioner‐led changes to health‐care delivery and the outcomes of such changes. Background Changing health‐care delivery is synonymous with the nurse practitioner role. The literature is critical of the lack of research by nurse practitioners, reporting the effects of a change to health‐care delivery. Design This study used a systematic integrative review by using Torraco's approach. Data sources Databases Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, MEDLINE, Web of Science and SCOPUS were searched for peer‐reviewed publications from 2000 to 2019. Review Methods A systematic approach was used to screen and analyse the literature. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied, and quality appraisal was undertaken by two reviewers. Results Eighteen articles were selected. The research projects were across the community and acute care settings. Research methodologies varied including preintervention and postintervention studies, evaluation of quality improvement projects, randomized controlled trial and descriptive studies. Multiple data collection tools were used. Two major themes were identified including evidence‐based practice champions and improved patient outcomes. Conclusion The nurse practitioner role is pertinent toward improving evidence‐based practice in clinical settings. Positive patient outcomes and praise for clinical leadership are evident in the literature. Research by nurse practitioners to date has focused on individual services.

Contrary to common perception, modern palliative care (PC) is applicable to all people with an incurable disease, not only cancer. PC is appropriate at every stage of disease progression, when PC needs emerge. These needs can be of physical, emotional, social, or spiritual nature. This document encourages the use of validated assessment tools to recognize such needs and ascertain efficacy of management. PC interventions should be provided alongside cardiologic management. Treating breathlessness is more effective, when cardiologic management is supported by PC interventions. Treating other symptoms like pain or depression requires predominantly PC interventions. Advance Care Planning aims to ensure that the future treatment and care the person receives is concordant with their personal values and goals, even after losing decision-making capacity. It should include also disease specific aspects, such as modification of implantable device activity at the end of life. The Whole Person Care concept describes the inseparability of the physical, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the human being. Addressing psychological and spiritual needs, together with medical treatment, maintains personal integrity and promotes emotional healing. Most PC concerns can be addressed by the usual care team, supported by a PC specialist if needed. During dying, the persons' needs may change dynamically and intensive PC is often required. Following the death of a person, bereavement services benefit loved ones. The authors conclude that the inclusion of PC within the regular clinical framework for people with heart failure results in a substantial improvement in quality of life as well as comfort and dignity whilst dying.

In November 2016, representatives of the Colombian state and the FARC-EP signed the final peace agreement which was designed to end Colombia’s protracted conflict. This peace agreement established a transitional justice system to address crimes committed during the conflict. There is broad consensus that the illegal drugs trade has contributed significantly to the Colombian conflict, but it is disputed whether drugs-related violence is a cause of conflict or a symptom of structural problems. This research explores how drugs and drug policy feature in contemporary memory projects produced by victims’ organisations and community groups, as well as state-sanctioned memory and truth-seeking interventions, including Colombia’s Commission for the Clarification of Truth, Coexistence, and Non-Repetition (CEV). The findings reveal that the global drug war is a critical blind spot in the country’s historical memory of contemporary armed conflict. I argue that the dissonance between the impact of the drug war in Colombia’s armed conflict, particularly since the mid-1990s, and how it is remembered in the country’s historical memory is striking. In crossing the boundaries between ‘political’ violence and the drugs war, my research breaks away from most scholarship about the causes of conflict in Colombia. In doing so, this research builds upon extensive scholarship concerning debates about causes of conflict in Colombia. I suggest that silence around the drug war in Colombia’s historical memory of armed conflict undermines the fundamental goal of the Colombian peace process to guarantee the non-repetition of the conflict and to construct a stable and long-lasting peace.

Introduction The Nurse Practitioner role is recognised as the highest level of clinical nursing. Leadership and research are identified as core attributes for Nurse Practitioners in the regulatory frameworks. There is an expectation that as clinical leaders, Nurse Practitioners have the ability to transform healthcare delivery within their specialist area of practice. Background The voice of Nurse Practitioners is limited in the current literature related to how they view their leadership contribution to Nursing. There has been some criticism in the evidence to date related to volume, consistency and transferability of Nurse Practitioner research. However, there is a shortage of evidence related to research from Nurse Practitioners, including their interpretation of research within their role. Design A mixed-methods, sequential explanatory study was completed. Nurse Practitioners from Ireland and Australia were contacted via their respective Professional Associations to participate in the research. Methods Phase one conducted an electronic survey to ascertain Nurse Practitioner leadership and research activities across Ireland and Australia. Phase two data collection was conducting through semi-structured interviews with participants to explore their understanding of leadership and research in their role. Results Nurse Practitioners perceive that they provide strong clinical leadership in transforming healthcare delivery for patient populations. Research is perceived by Nurse Practitioners in the traditional sense, of generating new knowledge, and they do not value the research work they do. Leadership and Research in the Nurse Practitioner role is similar in Ireland and Australia. Leadership of research was not found, due to a lack of time allocated to research and a lack of confidence to undertake research. Conclusion Nurse Practitioners provide patient focused clinical leadership in healthcare. Autonomy in clinical decision-making and the freedom to change health