Conectar
Adolescence is a time of rapid physical, social and psychological development and many risk factors for mental disorders have their roots in this age period. Primary prevention through school platforms has been extensively used and evaluated, but many interventions have poor uptake, high dropout and limited long-term sustainability. Mental health is a complex phenomenon and may be best supported through multicomponent interventions that more holistically consider inner, social and environmental levels. Character education-focused interventions are effective for improving adolescent psychosocial functioning and mental well-being. Therefore, an intervention that focuses on developing these strengths and is delivered within a school environment, through an adolescent-informed approach using creativity-focused components, has the potential to improve adolescent mental health and well-being.
This protocol describes the YiPEE cluster-randomised controlled trial with concurrent mixed-methods process evaluation and economic evaluation, which aims to determine the impact of a multilevel multicomponent intervention in schools in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. Clusters—defined as schools which include Grades 6–8 (ages 11–16 years), will be randomised to intervention (n=15) or control (n=15). The intervention consists of: an 8-week classroom-based component, a 12-week teacher-focused component and a board comprising members from across the whole school. All children attending Grade 7 (aged 12–15) will be exposed to the classroom component, and teachers who actively teach Grade 7 will be invited to participate in the teacher component. Within schools, students for the individual-level evaluation will be included if they are: (1) aged 12–15 years; (2) currently attending Grade 7; (3) competent to give consent and (4) have a legal guardian competent of giving consent. We aim to sample a minimum of 100 students from each school (n=3000). All teachers of Grades 6–8 will be recruited for the evaluation. The primary outcome is symptoms of anxiety and depression measured using an abbreviated version of the UNICEF MMAPP tool. The primary analysis will be intention-to-treat, comparing the mean change in mental health score between baseline and endline, between intervention and control clusters. In addition, we will record school monitoring data (student attendance, student grades). Individual interviews with students and teachers, focus group discussions with school staff, and ethnographic observations will provide data for the process evaluation. For the economic evaluation, the combined direct and non-direct costs will be compared with changes in mental health in the intervention arm.
The trial is approved by the Ethics Council of the Schizophrenia Research Foundation, India, with approval number EC/NEW/INST/2023/TN/0329. We plan to publish the main impact, process and economic evaluation results as academic publications in international peer-reviewed journals in 2026.
Clinical Trials Registry—India (CTRI/2024/07/070949).
To determine patients', nurses' and researchers' opinions on the appropriateness and completeness of the proposed conceptualization of nurses' support of hospitalised patients' self-management.
A modified Delphi study.
We conducted a two-round Delphi survey. The panel group consisted of patients, nurses and researchers. The conceptualization of nurses' support of hospitalised patients' self-management presented in the first Delphi round was based on previous research, including a scoping review of the literature. Data was analysed between both rounds and after the second round. Results are reported in accordance with the guidance on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies (CREDES).
In the first round all activities of the proposed conceptualization were considered appropriate to support the patients' self-management. Panel members' comments led to the textual adjustment of 19 activities, the development of 15 new activities, and three general questions related to self-management support during hospitalisation. In the second round the modified and the newly added activities were also deemed appropriate. The clarification statements raised in the first Delphi round were accepted, although questions remained about the wording of the activities and about what is and what is not self-management support.
After textual adjustments and the addition of some activities, the proposed conceptualization of nurses' support in patients' self-management while hospitalised have been considered appropriate and complete. Nevertheless, questions about the scope of this concept still remains. The results provide a starting point for further discussion and the development of self-management programs aimed at the hospitalised patient.
The results can be considered as a starting point for practice to discuss the concept of nurses' support for hospitalised patients' self-management and develop, implement and research self-management programs specific for their patient population.
Results are reported in accordance with the guidance on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies (CREDES).
Patients were involved as expert panellist in this Delphi study.
Self-management support during hospitalisation is understudied, which undermines the development of evidence-based interventions.
A panel, consisting of patients, nurses and researchers, agreed on the appropriateness of a conceptualization of nurses' support of inpatients' self-management, and identified some points for discussion, mainly related to the boundaries of the concept self-management.
This study is crucial for generating conceptual understanding of how nurses support patients' self-management during hospitalisation. This is necessary for policy, clinical practice, education, and research on this topic.
Supporting care receivers in Activities of Daily Living (ADL), irrespective of diagnosis, setting, or cultural background, lies at the heart of fundamental nursing care. The pursuit of quality ADL care becomes increasingly challenging with the changing complexity of care needs. ADL care delivery is often undervalued and is considered a low-status task despite its crucial importance to care receivers. This study aims to synthesize challenges in ADL care irrespective of the care setting.
In the mixed qualitative methods study, we used expert panel consultations, world café sessions, and a rapid literature review. For data analysis, we simultaneously analyzed the three data sets using inductive and deductive inquiry.
We identified four challenges and their corresponding subthemes. They are (1) Undervalued common-sense work versus complex, high-skilled care provision; (2) Limitations in professional reflective clinical decision-making; (3) Missed opportunities for shared ADL decisions; and (4) Meeting ADL care needs in a high-throughput system.
These challenges reveal the complexity of ADL care and how its paradoxical narrative relates to the conditions in which nursing professionals struggle to create opportunities, for reflective clinical reasoning and shared ADL decisions, by facing organizational and environmental barriers.
This study is relevant to nursing professionals, care organizations, policymakers, and researchers aiming to improve ADL care and provide insights into challenges in ADL care. This study forms the starting point for a changing narrative on ADL nursing care and subsequent quality improvements in the form of, for example, guidelines for nursing professionals.
FreshRSS 