Background: Using evidence-based practice (EBP) improves the implementation of safe, high-quality healthcare for patients, reduces avoidable costs, and plays a crucial role in bridging knowledge–action gaps and reducing health inequities. EBP combines the best available evidence in the relevant literature with patient preferences and values and healthcare professionals’ (HCPs) expertise. Methods: Systematic searches of ten bibliographic databases, unpublished works, and the Grey Literature Report sought studies published up to 30 September 2022. Results: The 15 studies retained involved 2712 nurses. Three types of effective educational interventions were identified: (1) multifaceted educational strategies incorporating mentoring and tutoring; (2) single educational strategies, often delivered online; and (3) multifaceted educational strategies using the five steps of EBP. Eleven primary outcomes (EBP beliefs, EBP self-efficacy, perceived EBP implementation, EBP competencies, EBP knowledge, EBP skills, EBP attitudes, EBP behaviors, EBP desire, EBP practice, and perceptions of organizational culture and readiness) were assessed using 13 qualitative and quantitative instruments. Conclusions: Ensuring the successful implementation of EBP requires effective educational strategies. Computer-based learning seems the most cost-effective and efficient strategy, when considering caregivers’ characteristics, the clinical field, and educational interventions across the pre-, peri-, and post-implementation processes.

Background: The population of Europe is aging rapidly. Most community-dwelling older adults (CDOAs) want to remain in their homes, particularly those experiencing functional decline. Politicians and academics repeatedly praise technological instruments for being the preferred solution for helping older adults with deteriorating health to remain at home.Objective: This study aimed to understand the perceptions of CDOAs and their informal caregivers (ICs) and professional caregivers (PCs) about technologies that can help keep older adults at home.Methods: This qualitative study used personal interviews, focus groups, and photo-elicitation interviews to better understand the perceptions of a convenience sample of 68 CDOAs, 21 ICs, and 32 PCs.Results: A fraction of CDOAs did not perceive technological instruments to be a very useful means of helping them remain at home. However, the ICs and PCs were more positive. The CDOAs preferred and were more willing to adopt technologies related to their mobility and safety and those that would help slow down their cognitive decline. The ICs preferred technological aids that assist in the activities of daily living as well as safety-related technologies for detecting falls and helping to locate disoriented older adults. The PCs preferred integrated communication and information systems to improve collaboration between all stakeholders, housing equipped with technologies to manage complex care, high-performance ancillary equipment to transfer people with reduced mobility, and surveillance systems to ensure safety at home.Conclusions: Although our study reports that CDOAs have limited interest in innovative technologies to help them remain at home, their technological skills will undoubtedly improve in the future, as will those of ICs and PCs. Technological tools will play an increasingly important role in home health care.

Objectives The present study analysed 4 years of a hospital register (2015–2018) to determine the risk of 30-day hospital readmission associated with the medical conditions and drug regimens of polymedicated, older inpatients discharged home. Design Registry-based cohort study. Setting Valais Hospital—a public general hospital centre in the French-speaking part of Switzerland. Participants We explored the electronic records of 20 422 inpatient stays by polymedicated, home-dwelling older adults held in the hospital’s patient register. We identified 13 802 hospital stays by older adults who returned home involving 8878 separate patients over 64 years old. Outcome measures Sociodemographic characteristics, medical conditions and drug regimen data associated with risk of readmission within 30 days of discharge. Results The overall 30-day hospital readmission rate was 7.8%. Adjusted multivariate analyses revealed increased risk of hospital readmission for patients with longer hospital length of stay (OR=1.014 per additional day; 95% CI 1.006 to 1.021), impaired mobility (OR=1.218; 95% CI 1.039 to 1.427), multimorbidity (OR=1.419 per additional International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision condition; 95% CI 1.282 to 1.572), tumorous disease (OR=2.538; 95% CI 2.089 to 3.082), polypharmacy (OR=1.043 per additional drug prescribed; 95% CI 1.028 to 1.058), and certain specific drugs, including antiemetics and antinauseants (OR=3.216 per additional drug unit taken; 95% CI 1.842 to 5.617), antihypertensives (OR=1.771; 95% CI 1.287 to 2.438), drugs for functional gastrointestinal disorders (OR=1.424; 95% CI 1.166 to 1.739), systemic hormonal preparations (OR=1.207; 95% CI 1.052 to 1.385) and vitamins (OR=1.201; 95% CI 1.049 to 1.374), as well as concurrent use of beta-blocking agents and drugs for acid-related disorders (OR=1.367; 95% CI 1.046 to 1.788). Conclusions Thirty-day hospital readmission risk was associated with longer hospital length of stay, health disorders, polypharmacy and drug regimens. The drug regimen patterns increasing the risk of hospital readmission were very heterogeneous. Further research is needed to explore hospital readmissions caused solely by specific drugs and drug–drug interactions.

Aims and objectives: To describe beliefs about evidence‐based practice and record levels of implementation among community health nurses working independently and in community healthcare centres in the canton of Valais, Switzerland.Background: In many settings, evidence‐based practice is considered a key means of delivering better and secure health care. However, there is a paucity of published studies on the implementation of evidence‐based practice in community health care.Design: Cross‐sectional descriptive study (n = 100).Methods: Beliefs about evidence‐based practice and levels of implementation were measured using validated scales developed by Melnyk et al. (Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, 5, 2008, 208). Information on respondents’ sociodemographic and professional characteristics was collected. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics.Results: The final response rate was 32.3% (n = 100). More than half of respondents had previously heard about evidence‐based practice; most believed in the value of using evidence to guide their practice and were prepared to improve their skills to be able to do so. However, the rate of implementation of evidence‐based practice in daily practice in the 8 weeks before the survey was poor. Statistically significant positive associations were found between beliefs about evidence‐based practice and how respondents had heard about it and between implementation rates and whether they had heard about evidence‐based practice and how they had done so. Evidence‐based practices requiring scientific knowledge and skills were implemented less frequently. Greater professional community healthcare experience and management roles did not increase implementation of evidence‐based practice.Conclusions: The systematic implementation of evidence‐based practice by community health nurses working independently and in healthcare centres in Valais was rare, despite their positive beliefs about it.Relevance to clinical practice: These results revealed the level of implementation of evidence‐based practice by nurses in community healthcare settings in Valais. Further research is required to better understand their needs and expectations and to develop suitable strategies that will allow the integration of evidence‐based practice into nurses’ daily practice.

Evidence of nurse presenteeism has mainly focused on quantifying its prevalence and consequences on productivity, quality of care, and patient safety. Few data exist on nurses’ perceptions of their presenteeism and its related causes. We explored concepts of presenteeism and its contributing factors with frontline nurses and nurse managers in different healthcare settings in Portugal and Switzerland. Our qualitative study design involved 8 online focus groups involving 55 participants. The transcribed data was explored using thematic analysis. Three main reasons for presenteeism were identified: unfamiliar terminology; the paradoxical effect of `being present’ but absent; and presenteeism as a survival strategy. Six contributing factors were also recognized: (a) institutional disinterest toward employees; (b) paradigm shift: the tension between person-centered and task-centered care; (c) sudden changes in care practices due to the COVID-19 pandemic; (d) a lack of shared work perspectives with hierarchical superiors; (e) the financial burden of being absent from work; and (f) misfit of human responses. This study generates valuable, in-depth knowledge about the concepts and causes of presenteeism, and significant suggestions for the broader audience of nurse managers and leaders seeking to improve the quality of care.

Nurses exhibit higher rates of presenteeism than other professionals, with consequences for the quality of care and patient safety. However, nurses’ perceptions of these issues have been poorly explored. This study investigated the perceptions and experiences of frontline nurses and nurse managers in Switzerland and Portugal about the consequences of presenteeism and strategies to minimize it in different healthcare settings. Our qualitative study design used video focus groups involving 55 participants from both countries. Thematic analysis of their transcribed discussions revealed six themes surrounding the consequences of presenteeism: the personal impact on nurses’ health and wellbeing, on their family relationships, and on professional frustration and dissatisfaction; the professional impact on work dynamics; the social impact on the quality of care and patient safety and on society’s impressions of the profession. At the individual, collective, and institutional levels, six strategies were evoked to minimize presenteeism: encouraging professionals’ self-knowledge; creating a positive work atmosphere; facilitating communication channels; developing a positive organizational culture; implementing preventive/curative institutional interventions; identifying and documenting situations linked to presenteeism. Nurses’ perceptions and experiences provided a deeper understanding of their presenteeism and revealed underused pathways toward preventing and minimizing presenteeism via bottom-up approaches.