Social Support in Nursing: A Review of the Literature

Nursing researchers have been investigating social support in the nursing profession with increasing interest, and the present manuscript reviews the state of the literature: methods, theories, and research findings related to social support in nursing. The aims of the existing research have focused primarily on understanding how the types, amount, and quality of social support received by nurses is associated with lower rates of professional stress, burnout, and intent to leave the profession. There is evidence that nurses in clinical settings value and are benefited by various forms of support from their supervisors. They also report lower distress when they have supportive personal relationships outside of work, although support from managers remains key. Support needs have been examined in different cultures and findings indicate that nursing in some parts of the world can be fraught because of cultural beliefs about the profession and about appropriate ways of enacting support. Less research has addressed the social support that nurses provide to patients and families. An agenda for advancing the literature is offered, with an emphasis on studying support from a communication perspective and learning more about what makes messages more or less supportive in nursing contexts

Health Literacy and Health Information Technology Adoption: The Potential for a New Digital Divide

This article discusses whether health literacy is associated with pateints' use of four types of health information technology (HIT) tools: fitness and nutrition apps, activity trackers, and patient portals

Developing a National Implementation Strategy to accelerate Uptake of Evidence-Based Family Caregiver Support in Us Cancer Centers

OBJECTIVE: Characterize key factors and training needs of U.S. cancer centers in implementing family caregiver support services. METHODS: Sequential explanatory mixed methods design consisting of: (1) a national survey of clinicians and administrators from Commission-on-Cancer-accredited cancer centers (N = 238) on factors and training needed for establishing new caregiver programs and (2) qualitative interviews with a subsample of survey respondents (N = 30) to elicit feedback on survey findings and the outline of an implementation strategy to facilitate implementation of evidence-based family caregiver support (the Caregiver Support Accelerator). Survey data was tabulated using descriptive statistics and transcribed interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: top factors for developing new caregiver programs were that the program be: consistent with the cancer center\u27s mission and strategic plan (87%), supported by clinic leadership (86.5%) and providers and staff (85.7%), and low cost or cost effective (84.9%). top training needs were how to: train staff to implement programs (72.3%), obtain program materials (63.0%), and evaluate program outcomes (62.6%). Only 3.8% reported that no training was needed. Qualitative interviews yielded four main themes: (1) gaining leadership, clinician, and staff buy-in and support is essential; (2) cost and clinician burden are major factors to program implementation; (3) training should help with adapting and marketing programs to local context and culture; and (4) the Accelerator strategy is comprehensive and would benefit from key organizational partnerships and policy standards. CONCLUSION: Findings will be used to inform and refine the Accelerator implementation strategy to facilitate the adoption and growth of evidence-based cancer caregiver support in U.S. cancer centers

Availability of Family Caregiver Programs in Us Cancer Centers

IMPORTANCE: Family caregivers provide the majority of health care to the 18 million patients with cancer in the US. Yet despite providing complex medical and nursing care, a large proportion of caregivers report no formal support or training. In recognition of this gap, many interventions to support cancer caregivers have been developed and tested over the past 2 decades. However, there are few system-level data on whether US cancer centers have adopted and implemented these interventions. OBJECTIVE: to describe and characterize the availability of family caregiver support programs in US cancer centers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional national survey study was conducted between September 1, 2021, and April 30, 2023. Participants comprised clinical and administrative staff of Commission on Cancer-accredited US cancer centers. Data analysis was performed in May and June 2023. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Survey questions about the availability of 11 types of family caregiver programs (eg, peer mentoring, education classes, and psychosocial programs) were developed after literature review, assessment of similar program evaluation surveys, and discussions among a 13-member national expert advisory committee. Family caregiver programs were defined as structured, planned, and coordinated groups of activities and procedures aimed at specifically supporting family caregivers as part of usual care. Survey responses were tabulated using standard descriptive statistics, including means, proportions, and frequencies. RESULTS: Of the surveys sent to potential respondents at 971 adult cancer centers, 238 were completed (response rate, 24.5%). After nonresponse weight adjustment, most cancer centers (75.4%) had at least 1 family caregiver program; 24.6% had none. The most common program type was information and referral services (53.6%). Cancer centers with no programs were more likely to have smaller annual outpatient volumes (χ2 = 11.10; P = .011). Few centers had caregiver programs on training in medical and/or nursing tasks (21.7%), caregiver self-care (20.2%), caregiver-specific distress screening (19.3%), peer mentoring (18.9%), and children caregiving for parents (8.3%). Very few programs were developed from published evidence in a journal (8.1%). The top reason why cancer centers selected their programs was community members requesting the program (26.3%); only 12.3% of centers selected their programs based on scientific evidence. Most programs were funded by the cancer center or hospital (58.6%) or by philanthropy (42.4%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this survey study, most cancer centers had family caregiver programs; however, a quarter had none. Furthermore, the scope of programming was limited and rarely evidence based, with few centers offering caregiving education and training. These findings suggest that implementation strategies are critically needed to foster uptake of evidence-based caregiver interventions

iPSCORE: A Resource of 222 iPSC Lines Enabling Functional Characterization of Genetic Variation across a Variety of Cell Types.

Large-scale collections of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) could serve as powerful model systems for examining how genetic variation affects biology and disease. Here we describe the iPSCORE resource: a collection of systematically derived and characterized iPSC lines from 222 ethnically diverse individuals that allows for both familial and association-based genetic studies. iPSCORE lines are pluripotent with high genomic integrity (no or low numbers of somatic copy-number variants) as determined using high-throughput RNA-sequencing and genotyping arrays, respectively. Using iPSCs from a family of individuals, we show that iPSC-derived cardiomyocytes demonstrate gene expression patterns that cluster by genetic background, and can be used to examine variants associated with physiological and disease phenotypes. The iPSCORE collection contains representative individuals for risk and non-risk alleles for 95% of SNPs associated with human phenotypes through genome-wide association studies. Our study demonstrates the utility of iPSCORE for examining how genetic variants influence molecular and physiological traits in iPSCs and derived cell lines

The Message Design Logics of Responses to HIV Disclosures

This article uses the theory of message design logics to investigate the relative sophistication of responses to disclosure of HIV status. In Study 1, 548 college students imagined a sibling revealing an HIV-positive diagnosis. Their responses to the HIV disclosures were coded as expressive (n= 174), conventional (n= 298), or rhetorical (n= 66). Type of message produced was associated with gender and HIV aversion. In Study 2, 459 individuals living with HIV rated response messages that were taken verbatim from Study 1. Expressive messages were rated lowest in quality, and rhetorical messages were rated highest. The discussion focuses on the utility of message design logics for understanding responses to HIV disclosures and the implications for message design logics

Inhibition of Hedgehog Signaling Alters Fibroblast Composition in Pancreatic CancerHedgehog Signaling in Pancreatic Cancer

PurposePancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a deadly disease characterized by an extensive fibroinflammatory stroma, which includes abundant cancer-associated fibroblast (CAF) populations. PDAC CAFs are heterogeneous, but the nature of this heterogeneity is incompletely understood. The Hedgehog pathway functions in PDAC in a paracrine manner, with ligands secreted by cancer cells signaling to stromal cells in the microenvironment. Previous reports investigating the role of Hedgehog signaling in PDAC have been contradictory, with Hedgehog signaling alternately proposed to promote or restrict tumor growth. In light of the newly discovered CAF heterogeneity, we investigated how Hedgehog pathway inhibition reprograms the PDAC microenvironment.Experimental designWe used a combination of pharmacologic inhibition, gain- and loss-of-function genetic experiments, cytometry by time-of-flight, and single-cell RNA sequencing to study the roles of Hedgehog signaling in PDAC.ResultsWe found that Hedgehog signaling is uniquely activated in fibroblasts and differentially elevated in myofibroblastic CAFs (myCAF) compared with inflammatory CAFs (iCAF). Sonic Hedgehog overexpression promotes tumor growth, while Hedgehog pathway inhibition with the smoothened antagonist, LDE225, impairs tumor growth. Furthermore, Hedgehog pathway inhibition reduces myCAF numbers and increases iCAF numbers, which correlates with a decrease in cytotoxic T cells and an expansion in regulatory T cells, consistent with increased immunosuppression.ConclusionsHedgehog pathway inhibition alters fibroblast composition and immune infiltration in the pancreatic cancer microenvironment

Which growth standards should be used to identify large- and small-for-gestational age infants of mothers with type 1 diabetes? A pre-specified analysis of the CONCEPTT trial

Abstract: Background: Offspring of women with type 1 diabetes are at increased risk of fetal growth patterns which are associated with perinatal morbidity. Our aim was to compare rates of large- and small-for-gestational age (LGA; SGA) defined according to different criteria, using data from the Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 1 Diabetes Pregnancy Trial (CONCEPTT). Methods: This was a pre-specified analysis of CONCEPTT involving 225 pregnant women and liveborn infants from 31 international centres (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01788527; registered 11/2/2013). Infants were weighed immediately at birth and GROW, INTERGROWTH and WHO centiles were calculated. Relative risk ratios, sensitivity and specificity were used to assess the different growth standards with respect to perinatal outcomes, including neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia, respiratory distress, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission and a composite neonatal outcome. Results: Accelerated fetal growth was common, with mean birthweight percentiles of 82.1, 85.7 and 63.9 and LGA rates of 62, 67 and 30% using GROW, INTERGROWTH and WHO standards respectively. Corresponding rates of SGA were 2.2, 1.3 and 8.9% respectively. LGA defined according to GROW centiles showed stronger associations with preterm delivery, neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia and NICU admission. Infants born > 97.7th centile were at highest risk of complications. SGA defined according to INTERGROWTH centiles showed slightly stronger associations with perinatal outcomes. Conclusions: GROW and INTERGROWTH standards performed similarly and identified similar numbers of neonates with LGA and SGA. GROW-defined LGA and INTERGROWTH-defined SGA had slightly stronger associations with neonatal complications. WHO standards underestimated size in preterm infants and are less applicable for use in type 1 diabetes. Trial registration: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. number NCT01788527. Trial registered 11/2/2013

CONCEPTT: Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Women with Type 1 Diabetes in Pregnancy Trial: A multi-center, multi-national, randomized controlled trial - Study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Women with type 1 diabetes strive for optimal glycemic control before and during pregnancy to avoid adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes. For most women, optimal glycemic control is challenging to achieve and maintain. The aim of this study is to determine whether the use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) will improve glycemic control in women with type 1 diabetes who are pregnant or planning pregnancy. METHODS/DESIGN: A multi-center, open label, randomized, controlled trial of women with type 1 diabetes who are either planning pregnancy with an HbA1c of 7.0 % to ≤10.0 % (53 to ≤ 86 mmol/mol) or are in early pregnancy (<13 weeks 6 days) with an HbA1c of 6.5 % to ≤10.0 % (48 to ≤ 86 mmol/mol). Participants will be randomized to either RT-CGM alongside conventional intermittent home glucose monitoring (HGM), or HGM alone. Eligible women will wear a CGM which does not display the glucose result for 6 days during the run-in phase. To be eligible for randomization, a minimum of 4 HGM measurements per day and a minimum of 96 hours total with 24 hours overnight (11 pm-7 am) of CGM glucose values are required. Those meeting these criteria are randomized to RT- CGM or HGM. A total of 324 women will be recruited (110 planning pregnancy, 214 pregnant). This takes into account 15 and 20 % attrition rates for the planning pregnancy and pregnant cohorts and will detect a clinically relevant 0.5 % difference between groups at 90 % power with 5 % significance. Randomization will stratify for type of insulin treatment (pump or multiple daily injections) and baseline HbA1c. Analyses will be performed according to intention to treat. The primary outcome is the change in glycemic control as measured by HbA1c from baseline to 24 weeks or conception in women planning pregnancy, and from baseline to 34 weeks gestation during pregnancy. Secondary outcomes include maternal hypoglycemia, CGM time in, above and below target (3.5-7.8 mmol/l), glucose variability measures, maternal and neonatal outcomes. DISCUSSION: This will be the first international multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of RT- CGM before and during pregnancy in women with type 1 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01788527 Registration Date: December 19, 2012

Continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (CONCEPTT): a multicentre international randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women with type 1 diabetes are a high-risk population who are recommended to strive for optimal glucose control, but neonatal outcomes attributed to maternal hyperglycaemia remain suboptimal. Our aim was to examine the effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) on maternal glucose control and obstetric and neonatal health outcomes. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, we recruited women aged 18-40 years with type 1 diabetes for a minimum of 12 months who were receiving intensive insulin therapy. Participants were pregnant (≤13 weeks and 6 days' gestation) or planning pregnancy from 31 hospitals in Canada, England, Scotland, Spain, Italy, Ireland, and the USA. We ran two trials in parallel for pregnant participants and for participants planning pregnancy. In both trials, participants were randomly assigned to either CGM in addition to capillary glucose monitoring or capillary glucose monitoring alone. Randomisation was stratified by insulin delivery (pump or injections) and baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from randomisation to 34 weeks' gestation in pregnant women and to 24 weeks or conception in women planning pregnancy, and was assessed in all randomised participants with baseline assessments. Secondary outcomes included obstetric and neonatal health outcomes, assessed with all available data without imputation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01788527. FINDINGS: Between March 25, 2013, and March 22, 2016, we randomly assigned 325 women (215 pregnant, 110 planning pregnancy) to capillary glucose monitoring with CGM (108 pregnant and 53 planning pregnancy) or without (107 pregnant and 57 planning pregnancy). We found a small difference in HbA1c in pregnant women using CGM (mean difference -0·19%; 95% CI -0·34 to -0·03; p=0·0207). Pregnant CGM users spent more time in target (68% vs 61%; p=0·0034) and less time hyperglycaemic (27% vs 32%; p=0·0279) than did pregnant control participants, with comparable severe hypoglycaemia episodes (18 CGM and 21 control) and time spent hypoglycaemic (3% vs 4%; p=0·10). Neonatal health outcomes were significantly improved, with lower incidence of large for gestational age (odds ratio 0·51, 95% CI 0·28 to 0·90; p=0·0210), fewer neonatal intensive care admissions lasting more than 24 h (0·48; 0·26 to 0·86; p=0·0157), fewer incidences of neonatal hypoglycaemia (0·45; 0·22 to 0·89; p=0·0250), and 1-day shorter length of hospital stay (p=0·0091). We found no apparent benefit of CGM in women planning pregnancy. Adverse events occurred in 51 (48%) of CGM participants and 43 (40%) of control participants in the pregnancy trial, and in 12 (27%) of CGM participants and 21 (37%) of control participants in the planning pregnancy trial. Serious adverse events occurred in 13 (6%) participants in the pregnancy trial (eight [7%] CGM, five [5%] control) and in three (3%) participants in the planning pregnancy trial (two [4%] CGM and one [2%] control). The most common adverse events were skin reactions occurring in 49 (48%) of 103 CGM participants and eight (8%) of 104 control participants during pregnancy and in 23 (44%) of 52 CGM participants and five (9%) of 57 control participants in the planning pregnancy trial. The most common serious adverse events were gastrointestinal (nausea and vomiting in four participants during pregnancy and three participants planning pregnancy). INTERPRETATION: Use of CGM during pregnancy in patients with type 1 diabetes is associated with improved neonatal outcomes, which are likely to be attributed to reduced exposure to maternal hyperglycaemia. CGM should be offered to all pregnant women with type 1 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy. This study is the first to indicate potential for improvements in non-glycaemic health outcomes from CGM use. FUNDING: Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, Canadian Clinical Trials Network, and National Institute for Health Research