This article investigates school vaccination for adolescents with intellectual and developmental disability through the lens of person-centred care principles.
This is a theoretical framework analysis in which qualitative interview data were mapped to the principles of a Person-Centred Practice Framework.
Data were drawn from Vax4Health, an empirical study that aims to improve vaccination uptake and experiences for adolescents with disabilities.
Our four-step process included: identifying elements of the school vaccination programme that relate to the Framework domains; mapping programme capacities and challenges by each domain; identifying key factors influencing person-centredness; and synthesising these key influencing factors into three themes.
We extrapolated three themes: (1) Parents and students expressed strong support for the programme, but there is potential to enhance their participation in vaccination decision-making processes. (2) Nurses bring high levels of motivation, clinical experience, empathy and creativity to vaccinate students, but opportunities remain to enhance disability-specific training and knowledge of individual students' needs. (3) Special schools are committed to supporting families and facilitating the programme, but limited resourcing and unclear responsibilities present challenges that need addressing. We discuss how these themes relate to the five domains of the Framework. Key considerations for vaccination programme improvement towards a more person-centred approach are highlighted.
Applying the Framework to the findings of the Vax4Health study identified a range of opportunities to improve person-centred school-based vaccination for adolescents with IDD. Future research could involve engagement with all stakeholders to co-design interventions aimed at applying person-centred care principles to vaccinating students with IDD.
The findings from this analysis could be used to inform future implementation research into person-centred approaches to school vaccination aiming for positive outcomes for adolescents with IDD, their families and schools and health professionals.
This project team aims to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of the Workforce Engagement for Compassionate Advocacy, Resilience, and Empowerment (WE CARE) program in improving the work environment, workplace mental health, and nurse outcomes, and (2) examine underlying factors influencing job satisfaction and intent to leave among staff nurses.
Quasi-experimental designs with one-group pre–post program design using online surveys.
Pre-program data were collected in June 2022 (n = 706), followed by the implementation of multifaceted, evidence-based interventions delivered by the WE CARE team, such as wellness rounding and resilience education. Post-program data were collected in November 2024 (n = 417). Mixed-effects regression models were utilised for analysis.
The WE CARE program was associated with statistically significant improvements in the overall work environment, workplace mental health (excluding resilience), and nurse outcomes, including job satisfaction and intent to leave. Job satisfaction positively correlated with a supportive work environment, recognition, and trust in supervisors, and negatively correlated with burnout, compassion fatigue, and distress. Higher levels of burnout and distress significantly increased the likelihood of nurses intending to leave their jobs, while greater trust in leadership and perceived organisational support were protective factors against leaving the job.
The project supports the effectiveness of evidence-based workforce engagement interventions in real-world healthcare settings to enhance the work environment, workplace mental health, and nurse outcomes. Interventions targeting emotional well-being, recognition, burnout reduction, and leadership trust may improve job satisfaction and reduce nurses' turnover intentions.
The program directly resulted in nurse leaders recognising the value of the WE CARE initiative and sustaining the team beyond the funding period. This project addresses a significant gap in the nurse well-being literature by demonstrating the effectiveness of a nurse-led, multifaceted wellness program designed specifically for nurses.
No patient or public contribution.
To describe a knowledge translation capacity-building initiative and illustrate the roles of nurses in practice change using an exemplar case study.
The report uses observational methods and reflection.
The Knowledge Translation Challenge program involves a multi-component intervention across several sites. The advisory committee invited eligible teams to attend capacity-building workshops. Implementation plans were developed, and successful teams receive funding for a 2 year period. Evaluation involved collecting data on program uptake and impact on practice change. Data has been collected from five cohorts. The exemplar case study employed an action-research framework.
Four nurse-led teams have demonstrated successful implementation of their practice change. The case study on implementing a clinical toolkit for clozapine management further illustrates a thoughtful planning process, and implementation journey and learnings by a team of nurses.
The Knowledge Translation Challenge program empowers nurses to use implementation science practices to enhance the quality and effectiveness of healthcare services. Success of this initiative serves as a model for addressing the persistent gap between knowledge and practice in clinical settings and the value of activating nurses to help close this gap.
As the most trusted and numerous profession, it is vital that nurses contribute to efforts to translate research evidence into clinical practice. The Knowledge Translation Challenge program supports nurses to lead practice change.
The Knowledge Translation Challenge program successfully equips nurses and other health care providers with the knowledge, skills and resources to implement practice improvements which enhance the quality and effectiveness of healthcare services and nursing practice.
The Knowledge Translation Challenge advisory committee has three patient-public partners that support teams to develop a patient-oriented approach for their projects by providing feedback on the implementation plans. Each team was also supported to include patient-public partners on their project.
To explore the perceptions and experiences of students raising concerns during pre-registration health and/or social care training in England.
Systematic review.
MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO and Education Research Complete were systematically searched for studies published between September 2015 and August 2024. Grey literature searches were conducted using Google Scholar and ETHOS British Library. Reference lists from included studies were hand searched.
Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidance for the conduct of systematic review informed conduct and the convergent integrated approach. Mixed methods appraisal tool was used for quality appraisal.
Eleven studies were included. Synthesis of findings generated three themes: (1) conflicting needs of self and others, (2) navigating the professional workspace and, (3) ‘choice to voice’.
Speaking up and raising concerns as a pre-registration student is a complex, multi-faceted and non-linear social phenomenon. Experiences and perceptions are impacted by the novice student position alongside individual, interpersonal and organisational factors. Open cultures within teams and organisations, leadership, support and feedback may enable students overcome barriers to raising concerns.
Raising concerns may reduce avoidable harm. Pre-registration students offer a ‘fresh pair of eyes’; however, they face barriers related to their student position. Synthesis of speaking-up experiences and perceptions of students in English settings can inform the design of learning environments which equip pre-registration students with the knowledge and skills required to cultivate safety behaviours. These skills contribute positively to safety culture and support learning and improvement in complex systems such as health and social care.
The review followed PRISMA reporting guidelines.
The conceptualisation of this project was informed by engagement events with higher education staff, students and Freedom to Speak Up Guardians.
Investigate the perception of male accessibility to the fields of nursing practice by those studying or teaching nursing in England.
Cross-sectional survey.
Online questionnaire with three closed-scale questions and two open-text questions designed to elicit perceptions on the accessibility of men to the fields of nursing practice. The questionnaire was distributed to the staff and students at 61 nursing schools in England. Inferential and descriptive statistics were used to analyse the closed questions data and inductive content analysis was used to analyse open-text questions data.
Students (n = 52) and staff (n = 51) responded to the survey. Adult (Mdn = 6, IQR = 2) and mental health (Mdn = 6, IQR = 2) were perceived as the most accessible fields of nursing practice to men, and child (Mdn = 4, IQR = 2) the least. Specialised practice areas in acute and emergency (Mdn = 6, IQR = 2), education (Mdn = 6, IQR = 2), leadership (Mdn = 7, IQR = 1), prison services (Mdn = 7, IQR = 1), and research (Mdn = 7, IQR = 2) were rated the most accessible to men and neonatal care (Mdn = 3, IQR = 3) the least. Societal stereotyping and stigma were seen as barriers to men entering the nursing profession. The perception that nursing is a feminised profession persists and a distrust of men is associated with child nursing. Men were viewed as progressing to leadership roles with greater ease than women.
Societal level stereotyping and stigma are perceived as prevalent in nursing practice areas considered less accessible to men entering the nursing profession.
This study adds insight into the gendered nature of nursing and highlights the barriers to men entering a profession with a workforce crisis.
STROBE cross-sectional studies guidelines. COREQ guidelines for content analysis.
No patient or public contribution.