Conectar
To identify the factors influencing professionals’ implementation of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines on self-harm.
A rapid review evidence synthesis
Five electronic databases (ASSIA, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO) and five indexing databases (Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI), Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) and Conference Proceedings Citation Index (CPCI)), using the Web of Science platform, were searched in December 2023 and repeated in July 2024.
We included quantitative and qualitative studies that investigated professionals’ knowledge and implementation of NICE guidelines on self-harm, that were in English language and published between 2004 and July 2024.
One reviewer used standardised methods to search, screen, select, quality assess and synthesise the included studies, to accelerate the review. Quality assessment was conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data were extracted and synthesised thematically using NICE guidance implementation priorities.
The review included 10 studies. Six were conducted in accident and emergency (A&E) settings, two in general practice, one in a burns and plastic surgery hospital department and one involved cross-sectoral health professionals. Key findings indicate that awareness and implementation of self-harm guidelines is low among health professionals. Systemic barriers include lack of staff training, negative staff attitudes towards people who self-harm and lack of resources.
There is a need to develop and implement regular training on self-harm, incorporating NICE guidance and measures, to integrate knowledge and mobilise practice changes. Further research into the implementation of NICE guidelines in children who self-harm is needed, and in a wider variety of health and social care settings. The absence of studies from the social care sector into professionals’ awareness and implementation of NICE guidelines on self-harm is a key limitation.
by Brooke Allemang, Francine Buchanan, Pranshu Maini, Dalya Kablawi, Lin Li, Linda Nguyen, Kimberly Courtney, Jessie Cunningham, Carla P. Southward, Kristin Cleverley, Sarah Munce, Alene Toulany
BackgroundPediatric patient and family engagement is an active and collaborative process, that involves children, adolescents, and family members with lived experience contributing to the design, implementation, and evaluation of healthcare services. Prior studies have highlighted the patient engagement methods and impact in clinical care, education, and research. However, gaps remain in understanding the commonalities and distinctions of engagement approaches, patient/family partner roles, and outcomes in clinical care, education, and research contexts. Further, research examining the nuances of pediatric patient and family engagement within healthcare delivery, education, and research in pediatric institutions is needed to streamline efforts.
ObjectiveThis scoping review will identify the commonalities of and distinctions between pediatric patient and family engagement in clinical care, education, and research contexts in pediatric healthcare institutions.
MethodsA scoping review, conducted in collaboration with a team of adolescent, young adult, and family partners, will allow us to systematically map out key concepts, evidence, and knowledge gaps regarding pediatric patient and family engagement in clinical care, education, and research. We will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute framework in the design and conduct of the review and guidance on engaging knowledge users within scoping reviews. The protocol for this scoping review has been registered with the Open Science Framework database (https://osf.io/63qx5).
ResultsThis study will describe the engagement types, approaches, and outcomes of pediatric patient and family engagement employed within clinical care, education, and research settings, highlighting commonalities and distinctions across contexts. In doing so, it will identify potential opportunities for collaboration and resource-sharing based on the context of engagement and provide needed clarity on streamlining pediatric patient and family engagement approaches within pediatric institutional settings.
ConclusionsIt is anticipated that the results will produce preliminary evidence of relevance to pediatric institutions seeking to consolidate engagement practices across clinical care, education, and research domains.
This study aims to provide an in-depth analysis of the symptoms, coexisting conditions and service utilisation among people with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) and long COVID. The major research questions include the clustering of symptoms, the relationship between key factors and diagnosis time, and the perceived impact of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines on patient care.
Cross-sectional survey using secondary data analysis.
Community-based primary care level across the UK, incorporating online survey participation.
A total of 10 458 individuals responded to the survey, of which 8804 confirmed that they or a close friend/family member had ME/CFS or long COVID. The majority of respondents were female (83.4%), with participants from diverse regions of the UK.
Primary outcomes included prevalence and clustering of symptoms, time to diagnosis, and participant satisfaction with National Health Service (NHS) care, while secondary outcomes focused on symptom management strategies and the perceived effect of NICE guidelines.
Fatigue (88.2%), postexertional malaise (78.2%), cognitive dysfunction (88.4%), pain (87.6%) and sleep disturbances (88.2%) were the most commonly reported symptoms among participants with ME/CFS, with similar patterns observed in long COVID. Time to diagnosis for ME/CFS ranged widely, with 22.1% diagnosed within 1–2 years of symptom onset and 12.9% taking more than 10 years. Despite updated NICE guidelines, only 10.1% of participants reported a positive impact on care, and satisfaction with NHS services remained low (6.9% for ME/CFS and 14.4% for long COVID).
ME/CFS and long COVID share overlapping but distinct symptom clusters, indicating common challenges in management. The findings highlight significant delays in diagnosis and low satisfaction with specialist services, suggesting a need for improved self-management resources and better-coordinated care across the NHS.
Knowledge models inform organizational behavior through the logical association of documentation processes, definitions, data elements, and value sets. The development of a well-designed knowledge model allows for the reuse of electronic health record data to promote efficiency in practice, data interoperability, and the extensibility of data to new capabilities or functionality such as clinical decision support, quality improvement, and research. The purpose of this article is to describe the development and validation of a knowledge model for healthcare-associated venous thromboembolism prevention. The team used FloMap, an Internet-based survey resource, to compare metadata from six healthcare organizations to an initial draft model. The team used consensus decision-making over time to compare survey results. The resulting model included seven panels, 41 questions, and 231 values. A second validation step included completion of an Internet-based survey with 26 staff nurse respondents representing 15 healthcare organizations, two electronic health record vendors, and one academic institution. The final knowledge model contained nine Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes panels, 32 concepts, and 195 values representing an additional six panels (groupings), 15 concepts (questions), and the specification of 195 values (answers). The final model is useful for consistent documentation to demonstrate the contribution of nursing practice to the prevention of venous thromboembolism. 
FreshRSS 