Clinical assessment instruments validated for nursing practice in the Italian context: a systematic review of the literature

Aims. With the aim to identify the instruments validated for Italian nursing practice, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken.Results. A total of 101 instruments emerged. The majority (89; 88.1%) were developed in other countries; the remaining (14; 13.9%) were developed and validated in the Ital-ian context. The instruments were developed to measure patient’s problems (63/101; 62.4%), outcomes (27/101; 26.7%), risks (4/101; 4%) and others issues (7/101; 6.9%). The majority of participants involved in the validation processes were younger adults (49; 48.5%), older adults (40; 39.5%), children (4; 4%), adolescents (3; 3%), and children/adolescents (1; 1%). The instruments were structured primarily in the form of questionnaires (61; 60.4%), as a grid for direct observation (27; 26.7%) or in other forms (12; 11.9%). Among the 101 instruments emerged, there were 1 to 7 validation measures documented with on average 3.2 (95% CI 2.86-3.54) for each instrument.Conclusions. Developing validation studies giving priority to those instruments widely adopted in the clinical nursing practice is recommended.  

Nursing minimum data sets: Findings from an umbrella review

Objectives: This study explores the evidence available on Nursing Minimum Data Sets (NMDSs) by summarising: (a) the main methodological and reporting features of the reviews published in this field to date; (b) the recommendations developed and published in such reviews regarding the NMDSs, and (c) the categories and items that should be included in the NMDSs according to the available reviews. Methods: An Umbrella Review was performed. A search of secondary studies published up to November 2021 that were focused on NMDSs for adult hospitalised patients was conducted using MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL and Scopus databases. The included studies were critically evaluated by using the Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses. The full review process was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and the Meta-Analyses statement. Results: From the initial 1311 studies that were retrieved, a total of eight reviews published from 1995 to 2018 were included. Their methodological quality was variable; these reviews offered four types of recommendations, namely at the overall, clinical, research and management levels. Additionally, seven NMDSs emerged with different purposes, elements, target populations and taxonomies. A list of categories and items that should be included in NMDSs have been summarised. Conclusions: Nurses are daily involved in the nursing care documentation; however, which elements are recorded is mainly defined at the local levels and relies on paper and pencil. NMDS might provide a point of reference, specifically in the time of health digitalisation. Alongside other priorities as underlined in available recommendations, and the need to improve the quality of the reviews in this field, there is a need to develop a common NMDS by establishing its core elements, deciding on a standardised language and identifying linkages with other datasets

Implications of quarantine among healthcare professionals: findings from a scoping review

: Although quarantine has been largely used in the recent period of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), there has to date been no summary of the available literature regarding its implications among health care workers (HCWs). A scoping review was performed, following The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. The CINAHL, PubMed, and SCOPUS databases were queried up to 31 January 2021. Nine studies ranging from low to high methodological quality, were included. These were conducted in diverse countries, predominantly regarding the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome and using cross-sectional designs. Quarantine was found to have multifaceted negative consequences that affected HCWs psychologically, professionally, personally, socially and economically. These findings could be useful as a framework for researchers while designing future study protocols, and for policy-makers or managers while establishing multidimensional effective strategies increasing HCWs' resilience and wellness

Fundamentals of care: revisione narrativa della letteratura

ABSTRACT Introduction Over the last decades, several research lines have been carried out to investigate factors hindering or promoting patient\u2019s safety and quality of care. Among them, the Fundamentals of Care (FOC) framework has reached an increased relevance worldwide. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the debate on FOC\u2019s concept, as well as its commonalities and differences with other relevant theoretical frameworks, and to underline some practical implications. Methods A narrative literature review has been performed in 2020. Studies have been identified in Medline (via PubMed) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases, and the International Learning Collaborative website by using the following keywords: \u2018Fundamentals of Care\u2019, \u2018Fundamental of Care\u2019, \u2018Nursing\u2019; publications performed by the eminent authors in the field (prof. Kitson A. & Feo R) have also been retrieved. Results The nurse-patient relationship is a crucial component to meet the fundamental care needs, articulated in physical, relational, and socio-psychological dimensions. Commonalities with the patient-centred care movement and with that of compassionate and unfinished nursing care have been summarized. Moreover, models of care delivery, studies highlighting the perspective of patients with regards to the FOC and the relevance of nursing minimum data set have been highlighted. Conclusions It is important to continue to build a professional and scientific dialogue on fundamentals of care by including them in the professional and scientific agenda of prioritie

Missed nursing education: Findings from a qualitative study

To understand what nursing education activities are missed in the daily life of nursing programmes, by also identifying antecedents and consequences of missed educational activities

Clinical assessment instruments validated for nursing practice in the Italian context: a systematic review of the literature

Aims. With the aim to identify the instruments validated for Italian nursing practice, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Results. A total of 101 instruments emerged. The majority (89; 88.1%) were developed in other countries; the remaining (14; 13.9%) were developed and validated in the Italian context. The instruments were developed to measure patient’s problems (63/101; 62.4%), outcomes (27/101; 26.7%), risks (4/101; 4%) and others issues (7/101; 6.9%). The majority of participants involved in the validation processes were younger adults (49; 48.5%), older adults (40; 39.5%), children (4; 4%), adolescents (3; 3%), and children/adolescents (1; 1%). The instruments were structured primarily in the form of questionnaires (61; 60.4%), as a grid for direct observation (27; 26.7%) or in other forms (12; 11.9%). Among the 101 instruments emerged, there were 1 to 7 validation measures documented with on average 3.2 (95% CI 2.86-3.54) for each instrument. Conclusions. Developing validation studies giving priority to those instruments widely adopted in the clinical nursing practice is recommended