Tobacco cessation Clinical Practice Guideline use by rural and urban hospital nurses: a pre-implementation needs assessment

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study was a pre-program evaluation of hospital-based nurses' tobacco intervention beliefs, confidence, training, practice, and perceived intervention barriers and facilitators. It was designed to identify relevant information prior to implementing tobacco cessation guidelines across a large northern rural region, home to 1 urban and 12 rural hospitals.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This cross-sectional survey was distributed by nurse managers to nurses in the 13 hospitals and returned by nurses (N = 269) via mail to the researchers.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Nurses were somewhat confident providing cessation interventions, agreed they should educate patients about tobacco, and 94% perceived tobacco counselling as part of their role. Although only 11% had received cessation training, the majority reported intervening, even if seldom--91% asked about tobacco-use, 96% advised quitting, 89% assessed readiness to quit, 88% assisted with quitting, and 61% arranged post-discharge follow-up. Few performed any of these steps frequently, and among those who intervened, the majority spent < 10 minutes. The most frequently performed activities tended to take the least amount of time, while the more complex activities (e.g., teaching coping skills and pharmacotherapy education) were seldom performed. Patient-related factors (quitting benefits and motivation) encouraged nurses to intervene and work-related factors discouraged them (time and workloads). There were significant rural-urban differences--more rural nurses perceived intervening as part of their role, reported having more systems in place to support cessation, reported higher confidence for intervening, and more frequently assisted patients with quitting and arranged follow-up.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The findings showed nurses' willingness to engage in tobacco interventions. What the majority were doing maps onto the recommended minimum of 1-3 minutes but intervention frequency and follow-up were suboptimal. The rural-urban differences suggest a need for more research to explore the strengths of rural practice which could potentially inform approaches to smoking cessation in urban hospitals.</p

A proposed systems approach to the evaluation of integrated palliative care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is increasing global interest in regional palliative care networks (PCN) to integrate care, creating systems that are more cost-effective and responsive in multi-agency settings. Networks are particularly relevant where different professional skill sets are required to serve the broad spectrum of end-of-life needs. We propose a comprehensive framework for evaluating PCNs, focusing on the nature and extent of inter-professional collaboration, community readiness, and client-centred care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In the absence of an overarching structure for examining PCNs, a framework was developed based on previous models of health system evaluation, explicit theory, and the research literature relevant to PCN functioning. This research evidence was used to substantiate the choice of model factors.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The proposed framework takes a systems approach with system structure, process of care, and patient outcomes levels of consideration. Each factor represented makes an independent contribution to the description and assessment of the network.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Realizing palliative patients' needs for complex packages of treatment and social support, in a seamless, cost-effective manner, are major drivers of the impetus for network-integrated care. The framework proposed is a first step to guide evaluation to inform the development of appropriate strategies to further promote collaboration within the PCN and, ultimately, optimal palliative care that meets patients' needs and expectations.</p

The assessment of pain in older people: UK National Guidelines

We are facing a huge increase in the older population over the next 30 years. This brings an anticipated increase in the prevalence of chronic pain and with this comes the challenge of assessment of pain in many varied settings. Our first iteration of this document was published in 2007. But there has been a proliferation of literature and research since then, so we have developed a new set of guidelines. Different patterns and sites of pain were seen in men and women. Age differences suggest that pain prevalence increased with age up to 85 years and then decreased. The available studies on barriers and attitudes to pain management point towards an adherence to bio-medically orientated beliefs about pain, concern amongst clinicians in relation to activity recommendations, and a negative orientation in general towards patients with chronic painful conditions. A multidisciplinary approach to the assessment and treatment of pain is essential, but the assessment is a complex process which is hampered by many communication issues, including cognitive ability and socio-cultural factors. Such issues are part of the UK ageing population. Structured pain education should be implemented that provides all health professionals (whether professionally or non-professionally trained) with standardised education and training in the assessment and management of pain according to level of experience. Although subjective, patient self-report is the most valid and reliable indicator of pain and it may be necessary to ask questions about pain in different ways in order to elicit a response. A number of valid and reliable self-report measures are available and can be used even when moderate dementia exists. The Numerical Rating Scale or verbal descriptors can be used with people who have mild to moderate cognitive impairment. For people with severe cognitive impairment Pain in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD) and Doloplus-2 are recommended. PAINAD and Doloplus-2 scales continue to show positive results in terms of reliability and validity. There has been no recent evaluation of the Abbey pain scale although it is widely used throughout the UK. There is a need for more research into pain assessment using the collaborative role of the multidisciplinary team in all care settings. Self-report questionnaires of function are limited in their ability to capture the fluctuations in capacity and ability. The concentration on items of relevance to the population of interest means that issues of personal relevance can be obscured. Strong associations were seen between pain and depressed mood with each being a risk factor for the other. Additionally, loneliness and social isolation were associated with an increased risk of pain. Clinicians should be cognisant that social isolation and or depressive signs and symptoms may be indicators of pre-existing pain or a predictor of future pain onset. There are a number of evidence based guidelines on pain assessment in older people with or without cognitive impairment from around the world, including Australia and Europe