Background and Purpose Pain is common in post‐stroke patients and has been shown to be associated with depression, fatigue, and decreased quality of life (QOL). However, studies examining different types of post‐stroke pain are scarce. We investigated differences in the related factors and their QOL impacts between musculoskeletal pain (MSP) and central post‐stroke pain (CPSP). Methods We assessed 364 consecutive stroke patients who were admitted to Asan Medical Center and contacted 12 months after stroke onset. We categorized pain and paresthesia as MSP, CPSP, combined pain, or other pain. Post‐stroke depression (Beck Depression Inventory), fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale), sleep disturbance (Verran Snyder‐Halpern scale), social support (ENRICHED Social Support Instrument), and QOL (Medical Outcome Study 36‐Item Short Form) were assessed. Results Of the 364 patients analyzed, 135 (37.1%) had pain, 78 (21.4%) had MSP, 22 (6.0%) had CPSP, 16 (4.4%) had combined pain, and 19 (5.2%) had other pain. In multivariate analyses, CPSP was related to modified Rankin scale (P=.004), sensory dysfunction (P<.001), thalamus lesion (P=.001), medulla lesion (P=.007), and fatigue (P=.026). MSP was related to motor dysfunction (P<.001) and fatigue (P=.003). QOL varied among groups with different types of pain (P<.001) and was the poorest in patients with combined pain. Conclusions Pain is common 12 months post‐stroke. The factors associated with CPSP and MSP differ, but are both closely associated with fatigue rather than depression. QOL is the poorest in patients with combined pain. Management of pain and fatigue may be important for improving the QOL in stroke patients.

This study aimed to determine whether family-centered multidisciplinary rounds could alleviate anxiety and uncertainty in illness and meet needs for critically ill patients’ families. A family-centered multidisciplinary rounds protocol was developed identifying needs of critically ill patients’ families, and family experiences were reviewed through in-depth interviews. A sequential mixed-methods study was utilized, combining survey data and semi-structured interviews in a tertiary medical intensive care unit in South Korea. A structured questionnaire assessed needs, anxiety, and uncertainty in illness for 50 participants. Interview data of 10 participants were analyzed using grounded theory. Assurance was the highest family need, followed by information need. Family needs differed according to gender, relationship to the patient, and length of intensive care unit stay. Participants reported family-centered multidisciplinary rounds provided a sense of relief, a chance to listen to medical staff, and a chance to provide medical staff with comprehensive information about patient care. Proximity needs were found to have a positive correlation with state anxiety, while comfort needs had a negative correlation with uncertainty in illness. Families reported family-centered multidisciplinary rounds were positive, useful experiences. Thus, standardization of family-centered multidisciplinary rounds is needed to meet families’ various needs.

Background: A pressure injury refers to localized damage to the skin and/or tissue due to prolonged pressure, and it has recently been defined to include pressure injuries related to medical devices. Medical device-related pressure injuries occur in various sites and are difficult to detect. Even if it is detected, medical devices are essential to life for critically ill patients. Thus, it is difficult to remove or change the position of the medical device; therefore, prevention is essential. This study aims to integrate the literature on medical device-related pressure injury prevention protocols among critically ill patients. Methods: The literature inclusion criteria were (1) critically ill patients, (2) device-related pressure injury interventions, (3) randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs, and (4) written in Korean or English. The literature search and selection were performed following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions with the support of the PRISMA Guidelines. Results: Twelve articles were finally selected. The incidence of medical device-related pressure injury decreased from 8.1–96.7% before intervention to 0.3–53.3% after intervention, respectively. Medical device-related pressure injury prevention was effective in reducing medical device-related pressure injury incidence when applied to patients of all ages, from neonates to adults, in a variety of intensive care units. Medical device-related pressure injury prevention strategies include nurse education, assessment, documentation, and interventions (hygiene, repositioning, emergent therapy such as protective dressing or designed equipment reducing pressure) of pressure injury. Pressure injury dressings primarily included hydrocolloid foam dressings, but transparent hydrocolloid formulations also effectively reduced medical device-related pressure injury incidence rates. Conclusions: In the future, it is necessary to increase the level of evidence by applying specialized medical device-related pressure injury prevention methods for different medical devices and areas of pressure injuries, and verifying their effectiveness. Trial registration: The review protocol was registered (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022346450).

This study identified clinical nurses’ fatigue and related factors during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a cross-sectional study. Data were collected from South Korean hospitals on 234 nurses’ general characteristics, fatigue, depression, occupational stress, insomnia, and perceived daytime sleepiness using a structured questionnaire. The prevalence of fatigue was 62.0%, depression 52.1%, insomnia 20.7%, and daytime sleepiness 36.1%. Insomnia, sleepiness, depression, and occupational stress were significantly associated with fatigue. Ward nurses who cared for COVID-19 patients within the past month had significantly higher occupational stress related to organizational climate than those who had not provided care, and ICU nurses who cared for COVID-19 patients had significantly higher job insecurity-related occupational stress. Nurses have a high prevalence of fatigue and depression during the pandemic. Thus, insomnia, sleepiness, depression, and occupational stress must be reduced to lower nurses’ fatigue. Caring for COVID-19 patients was not significantly associated with fatigue, but there were significant differences in occupational stress between nurses who provided such care and those who did not. Work environment-specific strategies are needed to reduce nurses’ occupational stress during the pandemic.