FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

What is the psychological and cognitive impact of returning Alzheimer disease dementia research results to healthy research participants? a delayed-start randomised clinical trial protocol for the WeSHARE study (Washington University study of having Alzhe

Por: Hartz · S. M. · Goswami · S. · Oliver · A. · Evans · A. · Jackson · S. · Linnenbringer · E. · Moulder · K. M. · Morris · J. C. · Mozersky · J.
Introduction

Returning research results that indicate risk of Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia—a disease for which no meaningful treatments or cure exist—to cognitively normal participants is controversial. AD is thought to begin many years before clinical signs and symptoms begin. During this time, individuals are cognitively normal but have biomarkers that indicate pathophysiological changes in the brain. With this study, we aim to evaluate the impact of returning research results on cognitively normal participants recruited from a longitudinal observational cohort on ageing at the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Centre (Knight ADRC) at Washington University in St. Louis.

Methods and analysis

Our study uses a 2-year, delayed-start randomised clinical trial design. Participants are randomised to receive their research results either 2 weeks or 1 year after informed consent. This study was approved to recruit up to 450 participants with existing genetic and biomarker testing results from the Knight ADRC. During the study period, 260 individuals were eligible and approached for entry into the study. The primary cognitive outcomes are 1-year change in subjective cognitive score on the clinical dementia rating sum of box scores and the objective cognitive score on cognitive composite score. The primary psychosocial outcome is change in geriatric depression scale score 1 year after return of research results. The study was powered to answer primary outcomes with 140 participants (70 per study arm).

Ethics and dissemination

This study has been approved by the Washington University School of Medicine (WUSM) Institutional Review Board and the Human Research Protection Office. Results from these trials are shared through conferences and publications.

Trial registration number

NCT04699786.

Telenursing practice in the care of patients with surgical cancer: a scoping review

Por: Mozer · C. A. d. N. · Goncalves · J. d. C. · Rozetti · C. M. T. · Carvalho · R. d. · Fiorin · B. H. · Furieri · L. B. · Fioresi · M.
Objectives

Surgical oncology patients often experience doubts and uncertainties in the preoperative and postoperative periods, which can be addressed remotely through telenursing. Expanding telenursing services could contribute to more comprehensive perioperative care. We conducted a scoping review to characterise these telenursing services, identify their outcome indicators and examine the content of the care delivered.

Design

A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) recommendations.

Data sources

MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Virtual Health Library (VHL), with searches performed up to 5 May 2025.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

We included studies that implemented telenursing interventions in the preoperative or postoperative period in adult oncology patients.

Data extraction and synthesis

Two independent reviewers used a standardised search to select and extract data from the included studies. Study characteristics were presented descriptively using absolute and relative frequencies, and the content of telenursing interventions was organised into a circular thematic matrix.

Results

A total of 37 studies were included, published between 1996 and 2024, conducted in 12 countries and primarily focused on postoperative telenursing via telephone or video calls. Preoperative care focused on psychosocial support and guidance related to surgical preparation. Postoperative topics included surgical wound care; handling of devices such as drains, ostomy bags and catheters; instructions for returning to work and support groups for financial and social assistance. Outcome indicators were primarily related to care, including levels of anxiety, stress, depression and quality of life.

Conclusions

Oncologic surgical telenursing remains primarily focused on postoperative care and the delivery of personalised support. Reporting on the protocols used, frequency and duration of sessions, nurse training and profiles, integration with in-person care workflows and operational cost data could strengthen the knowledge base for perioperative telenursing in oncology.

❌