Conectar
The National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP) currently involves a healthcare professional collecting a cervical sample in a healthcare setting. This method of screening has barriers associated with access to screening appointments and the poor acceptability of the speculum examination. Primary screening through HPV testing has led to the development of self-sampling screening methods including vaginal and urine self-sampling, with many UK studies comparing these screening methods with the current NHSCSP. It is not known what features of self-sampling influence individuals’ preferences and cervical screening uptake. To understand these preferences, we plan to undertake a discrete choice experiment (DCE). This protocol aims to describe the steps taken to design the DCE and the proposed approach to fielding the DCE to identify preferences for different sampling approaches in cervical screening.
An online survey comprising a DCE was designed to understand preferences of individuals for self-sampling methods within the NHSCSP. Attributes and levels for the DCE were generated through an iterative process including a literature review of qualitative studies about self-sampling cervical screening methods, input from cervical screening clinical experts and a patient and public involvement group (n=6). A D-efficient design was used to create choice sets for the DCE survey. Regression-based analysis will be used to estimate the impact of each attribute and level on individual choices.
This study has been approved by The University of Manchester Proportionate Research Ethics Committee (2024-20767-37669). The results of the DCE will be submitted for publication in a relevant peer review journal and the results will be presented at national and international conferences.
There are no data associated with this protocol. The data produced by this study and analysis scripts will be made available in a public repository following publication of the study.
To develop precision health (PH) competencies and evaluate their comprehensiveness and fit into nursing practice.
A modified e-Delphi technique was used to gather perceptions and achieve consensus on the inaugural set of PH domains, competency statements and sub-competencies developed by a workgroup formed under the aegis of the American Nurses Association (ANA).
A set of PH competencies and sub-competencies was developed by the ANA workgroup, beginning with a literature review, followed by a multi-step work process of the group over 3 years (2022–2025). Then, a modified e-Delphi technique was conducted via a four-point Likert scale Qualtrics survey, using a purposive sample of PH experts. The respondents were asked to agree or disagree with each competency or sub-competency statement and suggest modifications. The threshold of concordance was set at 80%.
The ANA workgroup reached consensus on six domains, six competency statements and 43 sub-competency statements to represent PH in nursing practice in its entirety. Forty experts in the field evaluated and offered revisions to the final 44 sub-competencies that represent the knowledge and skills necessary for PH in general nursing practice. A majority of the competency statements obtained favourable agreement from the expert panel, and a typical pattern of convergence was observed over two rounds of evaluation.
The development of PH competencies is the essential first step in the attempt to integrate PH into nursing practice.
The competency statements will inform nursing curricula, clinical practice guidelines, funding opportunities and role expectations in all healthcare settings.
This work sets the stage for subsequent interprofessional practice initiatives and research exploring how these competencies influence patient outcomes, workforce readiness and the practical integration of advanced technologies into precise care.
This study explored how Structured Medication Reviews (SMRs) are being undertaken and the challenges to their successful implementation and sustainability.
A cross-sectional mixed methods online survey.
Primary care in England.
120 clinical pharmacists with experience in conducting SMRs in primary care.
Survey responses were received from clinical pharmacists working in 15 different regions. The majority were independent prescribers (62%, n=74), and most were employed by Primary Care Networks (65%, n=78), delivering SMRs for one or more general practices. 61% (n=73) had completed, or were currently enrolled in, the approved training pathway. Patient selection was largely driven by the primary care contract specification: care home residents, patients with polypharmacy, patients on medicines commonly associated with medication errors, patients with severe frailty and/or patients using potentially addictive pain management medication. Only 26% (n=36) of respondents reported providing patients with information in advance. The majority of SMRs were undertaken remotely by telephone and were 21–30 min in length. Much variation was reported in approaches to conducting SMRs, with SMRs in care homes being deemed the most challenging due to additional complexities involved. Challenges included not having sufficient time to prepare adequately, address complex polypharmacy and complete follow-up work generated by SMRs, issues relating to organisational support, competing national priorities and lack of ‘buy-in’ from some patients and General Practitioners.
These results offer insights into the role being played by the clinical pharmacy workforce in a new country-wide initiative to improve the quality and safety of care for patients taking multiple medicines. Better patient preparation and trust, alongside continuing professional development, more support and oversight for clinical pharmacists conducting SMRs, could lead to more efficient medication reviews. However, a formal evaluation of the potential of SMRs to optimise safe medicines use for patients in England is now warranted.
FreshRSS 