Conectar
To examine the extent of adherence to high-level principles in remote prescribing and investigate how medical and non-medical prescribers comply with these principles.
Scoping Review.
A systematic search of CINAHL, PubMed, Medline, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Web of Science, and the Ovid Emcare databases was performed. A grey literature search was conducted on relevant professional websites and Google Scholar. Literature was searched from January 2007 to March 2025.
Research results were uploaded to Raayan for management and selection of evidence. Two reviewers independently scored and appraised papers using a structured data extraction form. The ‘United Kingdom High-level Principles for Good Practice in Remote Consultations and Prescribing’ served as a coding framework for deductive manifest content analysis.
Searches identified 6870 studies. After screening the title and abstract, 54 full texts were reviewed, and 14 studies were identified for analysis. Adherence to high-level principles was limited and inconsistent. Data categories were developed into 5 themes: (1) Patient privacy and vulnerability, (2) Adequate assessment, (3) Guidelines and evidence-based prescribing, (4) Investigations and safety netting, and (5) Organisational safety and creating safe systems.
This review provided insight into the challenges that medical prescribers face when adhering to governance principles during remote prescribing practice. However, no research about how non-medical prescribers integrate remote prescribing governance into their practice was found.
Remote prescribing has become firmly embedded within the current healthcare system and robust governance is required to safeguard patient outcomes. Further research exploring how non-medical prescribers integrate the high-level principles into practice will inform prescribing governance for this group.
No patient or public contribution was sought as the scoping review focused solely on the existing literature.
Our aim is to develop a Framework of Measurement for people living with Long COVID and their caregivers for use in Long COVID research and clinical practice. Specifically, we will characterise evidence pertaining to outcome measurement and identify implementation considerations for use of outcome measures among adults and children living with Long COVID and their caregivers.
We will conduct a scoping study involving: (1) an evidence review and (2) a two-phased consultation, using methodological steps outlined by the Arksey and O’Malley Framework and Joanna Briggs Institute. We will answer the following question: What is known about outcome measures used to describe, evaluate or predict health outcomes among adults and children living with Long COVID and their caregivers? Evidence review: we will review peer review published and grey literature to identify existing outcome measures and their reported measurement properties with people living with Long COVID and their caregivers. We will search databases including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus for articles published since 2020. Two authors will independently review titles and abstracts, followed by full text to select articles that discuss or use outcome measures for Long COVID health outcomes, pertain to adults or children living with Long COVID and/or their caregivers and are based in research or clinical settings. We will extract data including article characteristics, terminology and definition of Long COVID, health outcomes assessed, characteristics of outcome measures, measurement properties and implementation considerations. We will collate and summarise data to establish a preliminary Framework of Measurement. Consultation phase 1: we will conduct an environmental scan involving a cross-sectional web-based questionnaire among individuals with experience using or completing outcome measures for Long COVID, to identify outcome measures not found in the evidence review and explore implementation considerations for outcome measurement in the context of Long COVID. Consultation phase 2: we will conduct focus groups to review the preliminary Framework of Measurement and to highlight implementation considerations for outcome measurement in Long COVID. We will analyse questionnaire and focus group data using descriptive and content analytical approaches. We will refine the Framework of Measurement based on the focus group consultation using community-engaged approaches with the research team.
Protocol approved by the University of Toronto Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (protocol #46503) for the consultation phases of the study. Outcomes will include a Framework of Measurement, to enhance measurement of health outcomes in Long COVID research and clinical practice. Knowledge translation will also occur in the form of publications and presentations.
by Braeden A. Terpou, Lauren Lapointe-Shaw, Ruoxi Wang, Danielle Martin, Mina Tadrous, Sacha Bhatia, Jennifer Shuldiner, Simon Berthelot, Niels Thakkar, Kerry McBrien, Bahram Rahman, Aisha Lofters, J. Michael Paterson, Rita McCracken, Christine Salahub, Tara Kiran, Noah M Ivers, Laura Desveaux
Walk-in clinics (WICs), appreciated for their accessibility and convenience, have become an increasingly popular healthcare option in Ontario for patients with and without primary care enrolment. Despite their utility, WICs face criticism for delivering lower-quality care compared to comprehensive, enrolment-based primary care models. Critics argue that WICs contribute to system inefficiencies and encourage practice patterns misaligned with population health goals. This study explored physician perspectives on two key outcomes often associated with low-quality care in WICs: repeat primary care visits and potentially inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with Ontario-based family physicians (N = 19) who had experience practicing in both WICs and enrolment-based primary care. The findings highlight systemic challenges, including limited access to enrolment-based primary care and increasing healthcare demands, which have pushed WICs beyond their intended role. This misalignment has created tensions between their structure and purpose, resulting in visits that participants described as more transactional than those in primary care. These constraints—rooted in a lack of informational and relational continuity—often limited participants’ ability to provide in-depth engagement or follow-up care. Repeat visits were frequently linked to efforts to ensure continuity for complex or chronic conditions. Similarly, participants acknowledged the reality of potentially inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, attributing it to the high patient volume, desire to satisfy patient expectations, and a tendency to “err on the side of caution” when the nature of the illness is in question. The findings underscore how health system pressures and well-intended policies, such as Ontario’s primary care access bonus, can produce unintended consequences, including inequities in access and difficulties with care coordination across settings. Addressing these challenges requires reforms to better integrate WICs with the primary care system, alongside tailored training to support physician decision-making in episodic care contexts.The current diagnostic pathway for patients with a suspected inherited bleeding disorder is long, costly, resource intensive, emotionally draining for patients and often futile, as half of patients will remain without a diagnosis and be labelled ‘bleeding disorder of unknown cause’. Advances in understanding the genetic basis of the inherited bleeding disorders, coupled with both increasing infrastructure for genetic/genomic testing and decreasing costs, have increased the feasibility of introducing genomic testing into the clinical diagnostic pathway as a potential solution to improve the care of these patients. Yet, there remain evidence gaps on the optimal integration of genomic analysis into the diagnostic pathway.
Using a multicentre randomised-controlled trial design, we will evaluate an early genomic testing strategy for the diagnosis of newly referred patients with a suspected inherited bleeding disorder. Eligible participants will be randomised to early genomic testing diagnostic pathway (intervention) or standard diagnostic pathway (control) and will be followed for a 12-month period. Patients in the control group who remain undiagnosed at study end will be offered identical early genomic testing to ensure equitable access to the intervention. The study will follow a parallel fixed design with waitlist control group and a 1:1 allocation ratio. The study will be conducted at three tertiary care centres in Ontario, Canada, with a target sample size of 212 participants. Clinical utility will be evaluated via the primary outcome of diagnostic yield, as well as the secondary outcome of time to diagnosis. Additional secondary outcomes will allow for assessment of patient impact via health-related quality of life and patient burden measures, as well as evaluation of economic impact through a cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact analysis.
This investigator-initiated study was approved by the Queen’s University Health Sciences and Affiliated Teaching Hospitals Research Ethics Board through Clinical Trials Ontario (CTO-4909). Participant informed consent/assent is required. Findings will be disseminated through academic publications.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06736158.
To explore trial participants’ experience of long-term catheters (LTC), the acceptability of washout policies, their experience of the CATHETER II trial (a randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness of various washout policies versus no washout policy in preventing catheter associated complications in adults living with long-term catheters) and their satisfaction with the outcomes. The objectives of the healthcare professionals (HCPs) focus group and interview were to explore their attitudes towards weekly prophylactic catheter washout, views on the provision of training and participants’ ability to enact washout behaviours.
A longitudinal qualitative study embedded within the CATHETER II randomised controlled trial, which included semi-structured interviews and focus groups with participants from multiple trial sites. Data were analysed using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability and Theoretical Domains Framework. This UK community-based study included 50 (24 female, 26 male) CATHETER II trial participants, aged between 23 and 100 years, with LTC and able to self-manage the washout and study documentation either independently or with the help of a carer. Seven HCPs (five female, two male) also participated.
The participants had positive attitudes towards weekly prophylactic saline or acidic catheter washouts and other trial elements, such as washout training, catheter calendar and monthly phone calls. Participants and HCPs found the ‘ask’ of the CATHETER II trial and the weekly self-administered prophylactic washout policies to be feasible. The participants reported that the catheter washout training provided during the trial enhanced their self-efficacy, skills and self-reported capability to carry out the washouts. Participants reported having positive outcomes from the weekly washout. These included reduced blockage, pain or infection, reduced need for HCP support and greater psychological reassurance. HCPs attested to the participants’ understanding of and adherence to the weekly washouts and other elements of the trial.
This study shows acceptability, feasibility and self-reported fidelity of the CATHETER II trial on a behavioural level. Self-management for prophylactic catheter washouts is both feasible and, following training, achievable without any need for additional support.
To identify the barriers and enablers of effective transitions of care between the emergency department and primary care providers.
Successful patient care transitions from the emergency department to primary care providers are important because this process has implications for the quality, patient safety, and cost of patient care. Failure in follow-up consultations with primary care can result in representations to the emergency department, which can impact negative emergency department operational issues throughout the entire hospital.
An integrative systematic review was reported according to PRISMA guidelines. The reviewers followed a systematic review protocol registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022316165). A search strategy was applied to extract articles from included databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health databases. Articles were assessed using a predetermined eligibility criterion. Quality assessment and a narrative synthesis were conducted.
Of the 1200 articles screened, 25 studies were included. Four additional articles were identified from reference lists. The range of study designs included: four qualitative, three mixed methods and 22 quantitative studies. A total of 291,012 patients were represented. Successful care transition was enhanced by access to insurance, ease of payment methods, effective communication, prior booked primary care provider appointments and access to transportation. Many patients experienced financial toxicity, and the shortfall between fees charged and rebates provided was found to influence primary care provider follow-up compliance.
Future recommendations to provide safe and effective transitions of care would be to optimise supported self-management for patients and deliver timely and clear communication with standardised discharge documentation to be shared between the emergency department and primary care providers.
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to delivering safe care transitions between emergency department and primary care providers, and future research should target high-risk groups.
Prospero: CRD42022316165
To explore the experiences of partnership nursing among nurses when caring for children and young people with long-term conditions, and their families.
Partnership nursing is promoted as a positive model of care among paediatric nurses, where shared roles and decision-making, parental participation, mutual trust and respect, communication and negotiation are valued to create positive care experiences and enhance patient outcomes. Little is known about how nurses use partnership with both the patient and the parents in this triad to deliver partnership nursing.
A qualitative systematic review followed Joanna Briggs Institute meta-aggregation approach and has been reported according to PRISMA guidelines.
A comprehensive systematic search was conducted in seven electronic databases. Studies were assessed according to a pre-determined inclusion criteria. Qualitative findings with illustrative participant quotes were extracted from included studies and grouped into categories to inform overall synthesised findings. Methodological quality assessment was conducted.
A total of 5837 publications were screened, and 41 qualitative studies were included. Three overarching synthesised findings were identified: (1) Using education to promote feelings of safety and support, (2) Partnering to develop a strong therapeutic relationship and (3) Optimising communication underpinned by shared decision-making principles to deliver individualised care.
Nurses demonstrated successful partnership in their practice, but focused on developing dyadic nurse–parent and dyadic nurse–child partnerships. Future practice development that creates a three-way triadic partnership may aid therapeutic relationships and shared decision-making.
Clinicians can reflect on how dyadic partnerships (focusing on the child or the parent) may exclude opportunities for coherent care. Further exploration in practice, policy and research as to how nurses determine child competency and child and parent level of engagement in triadic partnership may improve the potential of meaningful shared decision-making.
To explore how the Cognitive Continuum Theory has been used in qualitative nursing research and to what extent it has been integrated in the research process using the Qualitative Network for Theory Use and Methodology (QUANTUM).
Theory, research and nursing are intrinsically linked, as are decision-making and nursing practice. With increasing pressure on nurses to improve patient outcomes, systematic knowledge regarding decision-making is critical and urgent.
A meta-aggregative systematic review.
CINAHL, Medline, PsycINFO, Embase and PubMed were searched from inception until May 2022 for peer-reviewed research published in English.
Seven studies were included and assessed for methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for qualitative research. A meta-aggregative synthesis was conducted using Joanna Briggs methodology. The QUANTUM typology was used to evaluate the visibility of the Cognitive Continuum Theory in the research process.
The review identified five synthesised findings, namely: 1. the decision-making capacity of the individual nurse, 2. nurses’ level of experience, 3. availability of decision support tools, 4. the availability of resources and 5. access to senior staff and peers. Only two of seven studies rigorously applied the theory. The included studies were mainly descriptive-exploratory in nature.
The transferability of the Cognitive Continuum Theory was demonstrated; however, evolution or critique was absent. A gap in the provision of a patient-centric approach to decision-making was identified. Education, support and research is needed to assist decision-making.
A new Person-Centred Nursing Model of the Cognitive Continuum Theory has been proposed to guide future research in clinical decision-making.
Nurses make numerous decisions every day that directly impact patient care, therefore development and testing of new theories, modification and revision of older theories to reflect advances in knowledge and technology in contemporary health care are essential.
FreshRSS 