The intellectual capital supporting nurse practice in a post-emergency state: A case study

Aim To explore the resources supporting current nurse practice in the post-emergency country of Liberia, using the nursing intellectual capital framework, as nurses work to meet the targets set by Government of Liberia\u27s Essential Package of Health Services. Design Case study. Methods Data were collected in Liberia February–June 2019. Direct observation, semi-structured interviews and photographs were used to investigate how nurse practice is supported. Field notes, transcripts and photographs were coded using both directed and conventional content analysis. Reports were then generated by code to triangulate the data. Results Thirty-seven nurses at 12 health facilities participated. The intellectual capital supporting inpatient and outpatient nurse practice differs in important ways. Inpatient nurse practice is more likely to be supported by facility-based protocols and trainings, whereas outpatient nurse practice is more likely to be supported by external protocols and trainings, often developed by the Liberian government or non-governmental organizations. This can lead to uneven provision of inpatient protocols and trainings, often favouring private facilities. Similarly, inpatient nurses rely primarily on other nurses at their facilities for clinical support while outpatient nurses often have external professional relationships that provided them with clinical guidance. Conclusion Much has been accomplished to enable outpatient nurses to provide the primary- and secondary-care target services in the Essential Package of Health Services. However, as the Liberian government and its partners continue to work towards providing certain tertiary care services, developing analogous protocols, trainings and clinical mentorship networks for inpatient nurses will likely be fruitful, and will decrease the burden on individual facilities. Impact Nurses are often expected to meet new service provision targets in post-emergency states. Further research into how best to support nurses as they work to meet those targets has the potential to strengthen health systems

Sex and authorship in global cancer research

Introduction Research is an essential pillar of cancer control and key in shaping regional cancer control agendas. Imbalances in science and technology in terms of lack of female participation have been well documented. However, there is little evidence about country-level female participation in cancer research. Methodology Through a complex filter, cancer research papers were identified and grouped by countries and sex of the first and last authors of each paper and analysed by the percentage of females in these positions alongside other parameters. Results Our analysis of 56 countries’ outputs, in 2009, revealed that females were the first authors in 37.2% and last authors in 23.3% of papers. In 2019, females were the first author in 41.6% and last author in 29.4% of papers. Females increased as first authors by 26%, and as last authors by 12% between these two time periods. The top performing countries in terms female/male parity for first or last authorship were in Eastern and Southern Europe as well as Latin American countries.From 2009 to 2019, the highest proportion of females as first and last authors were from low-income and middle-income countries in Latin America and Eastern Europe.Females were more likely to publish in lower impact journals and were less likely to be cited compared to males. Conclusions Globally, progress in female’s authorship in oncology research has been uneven. More research is needed to understand the reasons behind this. Advancing diversity and equity in research leadership and authorship will be essential to address the complex challenges of cancer globally

Tobacco smoking changes during the first pre-vaccination phases of the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Globally, tobacco smoking remains the largest preventable cause of premature death. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced nations to take unprecedented measures, including ‘lockdowns’ that might impact tobacco smoking behaviour. We performed a systematic review and meta-analyses to assess smoking behaviour changes during the early pre-vaccination phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Methods: We searched Medline/Embase/PsycINFO/BioRxiv/MedRxiv/SSRN databases (January–November 2020) for published and pre-print articles that reported specific smoking behaviour changes or intentions after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We used random-effects models to pool prevalence ratios comparing the prevalence of smoking during and before the pandemic, and the prevalence of smoking behaviour changes during the pandemic. The PROSPERO registration number for this systematic review was CRD42020206383. Findings: 31 studies were included in meta-analyses, with smoking data for 269,164 participants across 24 countries. The proportion of people smoking during the pandemic was lower than that before, with a pooled prevalence ratio of 0·87 (95%CI:0·79–0·97). Among people who smoke, 21% (95%CI:14–30%) smoked less, 27% (95%CI:22–32%) smoked more, 50% (95%CI:41%-58%) had unchanged smoking and 4% (95%CI:1–9%) reported quitting smoking. Among people who did not smoke, 2% (95%CI:1–3%) started smoking during the pandemic. Heterogeneity was high in all meta-analyses and so the pooled estimates should be interpreted with caution (I2\u3e91% and p-heterogeneity\u3c0·001). Almost all studies were at high risk of bias due to use of non-representative samples, non-response bias, and utilisation of non-validated questions. Interpretation: Smoking behaviour changes during the first phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 were highly mixed. Meta-analyses indicated that there was a relative reduction in overall smoking prevalence during the pandemic, while similar proportions of people who smoke smoked more or smoked less, although heterogeneity was high. Implementation of evidence-based tobacco control policies and programs, including tobacco cessation services, have an important role in ensuring that the COVID-19 pandemic does not exacerbate the smoking pandemic and associated adverse health outcomes

Implementation of a large-scale breast cancer early detection program in a resource-constrained setting: real-world experiences from 2 large states in India

Background: The Breast Health Initiative (BHI) was launched to demonstrate a scalable model to improve access to early diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Methods: A package of evidence-based interventions was codesigned and implemented with the stakeholders, as part of the national noncommunicable disease program, through the existing primary health care system. Data from the first 18 months of the BHI are presented. Results: A total of 108,112 women received breast health education; 48% visited the health facilities for clinical breast examination (CBE), 3% had a positive CBE result, and 41% were referred to a diagnostic facility. The concordance of CBE findings between health care providers and adherence to follow-up care improved considerably, with more women visiting the diagnostic facilities and completing diagnostic evaluation within 1 month from initial screening, and with only 9% lost to follow-up. The authors observed a clinically meaningful decrease in time to complete diagnostic evaluation with biopsy, from 37 to 9 days. Conclusions: The results demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing a large-scale, decentralized breast cancer early detection program delivered through the existing primary health care system in India

Barriers to family history collection among Spanish-speaking primary care patients: a BRIDGE qualitative study

Objects: Family history is an important tool for assessing disease risk, and tailoring recommendations for screening and genetic services referral. This study explored barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients. Methods: This qualitative study was conducted in two US healthcare systems. We conducted semi-structured interviews with medical assistants, physicians, and interpreters with experience collecting family history for Spanish-speaking patients. Results: The most common patient-level barrier was the perception that some Spanish-speaking patients had limited knowledge of family history. Interpersonal communication barriers related to dialectical differences and decisions about using formal interpreters vs. Spanish-speaking staff. Organizational barriers included time pressures related to using interpreters, and ad hoc workflow adaptations for Spanish-speaking patients that might leave gaps in family history collection. Conclusions: This study identified multi-level barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients in primary care. Findings suggest that a key priority to enhance communication would be to standardize processes for working with interpreters. Innovation: To improve communication with and care provided to Spanish-speaking patients, there is a need to increase healthcare provider awareness about implicit bias, to address ad hoc workflow adjustments within practice settings, to evaluate the need for professional interpreter services, and to improve digital tools to facilitate family history collection

Roles and activities of nurses in cancer prevention and early detection in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review

Objective: Nurses play a crucial role in cancer control. Prior reviews presented the effectiveness of nursing interventions such as tobacco cessation counseling and cervical cancer screening but did not focus on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This scoping review addresses a gap in the literature by describing the roles and activities of nurses in cancer prevention and early detection in LMICs. Methods: Following Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework, we searched seven databases using subject headings and keywords from 1990 to January 2021 and updated in April 2022. The reference lists of relevant studies were also searched. Two reviewers independently screened the relevance of studies through Rayyan, assessed full text articles, and extracted data using a Google Form. Conflicts were resolved by a third reviewer. Results: A total of 180 studies were included, representing all six World Health Organization regions and 48 LMICs. The largest number of studies were from the African region (n ​= ​72), the Americas (n ​= ​49), and South-East Asia region (n ​= ​29). The main nursing roles featured were patient/community education (n ​= ​113), history taking and cancer risk assessment (n ​= ​63), performing screening exams (n ​= ​136), care coordination (n ​= ​57), and training other healthcare professionals (n ​= ​9). Conclusions: This scoping review provides a comprehensive picture of nurses’ role in cancer prevention and early detection in LMICs, across all six World Health Organization regions. Additional cancer workforce data sources at the country level are needed to fully understand the activities of nurses in cancer prevention. Future research is also needed to measure the impact of nursing educational and other interventions in both primary and secondary cancer prevention

A systematic review and meta-analysis of tobacco smoking behaviour changes during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background Globally, tobacco smoking remains the largest cause of premature death. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced nations to take unprecedented measures including ‘lockdowns’ that might impact tobacco smoking behaviour. We performed a systematic review and meta-analyses to assess smoking behaviour changes during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We searched Medline/Embase/PsycINFO/BioRxiv/MedRxiv/SSRN databases (January-November 2020) for published and pre-print articles that reported specific smoking behaviour changes or intentions after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We used random-effects models to pool prevalence ratios comparing the prevalence of smokers during and before the pandemic, and the prevalence of smoking behaviour changes. Results 33 studies were included in meta-analyses, with smoking data for ∼230,000 participants across 24 countries. The proportions of smokers during and before the pandemic were similar, with a pooled prevalence ratio 0.85 (95%CI:0.76-0.95). In studies limited to smokers, 27% (95%CI:21-32%) smoked more, 17% (95%CI:13-21%) smoked less, 54% (95%CI:47-61%) smoked the same and 5% (95%CI:2-9%) reported quitting smoking. Among all participants, 1% (95%CI:0-2%) started smoking during the pandemic. All studies were at high risk of bias due to use of non-representative samples, likely non-response bias, and utilisation of non-validated questions. Conclusions Smoking behaviour changes during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic were highly mixed. Meta-analyses indicated slightly lower overall smoking prevalence during the pandemic, but higher intensity among smokers. Key messages More recent and higher quality studies of smoking behaviour changes are required to measure the longer term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

Tobacco smoking changes during the first pre-vaccination phases of the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Globally, tobacco smoking remains the largest preventable cause of premature death. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced nations to take unprecedented measures, including ‘lockdowns’ that might impact tobacco smoking behaviour. We performed a systematic review and meta-analyses to assess smoking behaviour changes during the early pre-vaccination phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Methods We searched Medline/Embase/PsycINFO/BioRxiv/MedRxiv/SSRN databases (January–November 2020) for published and pre-print articles that reported specific smoking behaviour changes or intentions after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We used random-effects models to pool prevalence ratios comparing the prevalence of smoking during and before the pandemic, and the prevalence of smoking behaviour changes during the pandemic. The PROSPERO registration number for this systematic review was CRD42020206383. Findings 31 studies were included in meta-analyses, with smoking data for 269,164 participants across 24 countries. The proportion of people smoking during the pandemic was lower than that before, with a pooled prevalence ratio of 0·87 (95%CI:0·79–0·97). Among people who smoke, 21% (95%CI:14–30%) smoked less, 27% (95%CI:22–32%) smoked more, 50% (95%CI:41%-58%) had unchanged smoking and 4% (95%CI:1–9%) reported quitting smoking. Among people who did not smoke, 2% (95%CI:1–3%) started smoking during the pandemic. Heterogeneity was high in all meta-analyses and so the pooled estimates should be interpreted with caution (I2>91% and p-heterogeneity<0·001). Almost all studies were at high risk of bias due to use of non-representative samples, non-response bias, and utilisation of non-validated questions. Interpretation Smoking behaviour changes during the first phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 were highly mixed. Meta-analyses indicated that there was a relative reduction in overall smoking prevalence during the pandemic, while similar proportions of people who smoke smoked more or smoked less, although heterogeneity was high. Implementation of evidence-based tobacco control policies and programs, including tobacco cessation services, have an important role in ensuring that the COVID-19 pandemic does not exacerbate the smoking pandemic and associated adverse health outcomes

Internal and External Barriers to Energy Efficiency: Made-to-Measure Policy Interventions

This paper has two objectives. First it provides a correlation between internal and external barriers to energy efficiency and consumer behaviour related to two domains. It evaluates behaviour related to energy curtailment, which represents routine, repetitive effort to decrease consumption on a day-to-day basis. It also considers behaviour related to investments, which are one time actions such as purchasing new energy efficiency technologies.. Second, it assesses the effectiveness of the different interventions and programs in addressing the two types of barriers (internal and external) with the aim of informing the policy debate. By assessing the value of a large number of interventions, this paper is one of the first that combines in a unified framework the main findings of different disciplines, from economics to psychology