To explore nurses’ perceptions of evidence-based nursing courses for undergraduates through academic-practice partnerships. A deductive thematic analysis based on the practice-academic logic model. Fifteen academic and clinical nurses were interviewed between November and December 2023, either online or through face-to-face meetings. Each interview lasted 20–30 min. The interview outline was constructed based on the practice-academic partnership logic model, which was followed during the process of recorded, analyzed, and checked. Themes identified include inputs (e.g., stakeholder commitment), activities (e.g., communication), outputs (e.g., nursing projects), and outcomes (e.g., improved competence). These themes highlight the various aspects and outcomes of academic-practice partnerships in evidence-based nursing courses. Effective academic-practice partnerships are crucial for developing evidence-based nursing courses, leading to positive educational and professional outcomes. Nurses’ perceptions provide valuable guidelines for developing effective evidence-based nursing courses. No patient or public users participated in this study.

Aim. To explore academic and clinical nurses perceptions and experiences on academic-practice partnership in evidence-based practice. Background. Academic-practice partnership could promote evidence-based practice which is crucial for high-quality care. Academic and clinical nurses are the foundation of the partnerships; however, there is little knowledge of their perceptions and experiences on academic-practice partnership in evidence-based practice. Methods. This is an interpretive description study. Twenty-two eligible participants were interviewed through face-to-face or online videoconferencing meetings. Guiding questions for the interviews focused on the perceptions and experiences of academic-practice partnership in the context of evidence-based practice. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and checked verbatim. We used constant comparative analysis to analyze the qualitative data. Results. Four themes with fifteen subthemes were generated: necessities, modes, challenges, and benefits of the academic-practice partnership in evidence-based practice. Participants believed that academic-practice partnership was a necessary strategy to promote evidence-based practice and could be built through different modes. Nevertheless, most academic-practice partnerships were superficial because of specific types of challenges. However, a good academic-practice partnership could create a win-win situation for both nursing academia and clinical practice. Conclusion. Academic-practice partnership is a win-win strategy for both the academic side and clinical side to promote evidence-based practice. Different modes of academic-practice partnership provide academic and clinical nurses with more opportunities to promote evidence-based practice with a higher likelihood of successful implementation. However, related challenges require multilevel measures to provide better environments to initiate, build, and maintain intensive collaborations between academic and clinical nurses. Implications for Nursing Management. Academic and clinical organizations, leaders, and individuals should take multilevel measures to initiate, build, and maintain a close academic-practice partnership to promote evidence-based practice, which is crucial for high-quality nursing care, patient safety, and nursing discipline development.

Background and Objectives: Sleep problems are common among informal caregivers of people with dementia. Although various nonpharmacological interventions developed to improve caregivers’ sleep, comprehensive syntheses of their categories and effectiveness are lacking. This study synthesizes the types of nonpharmacological interventions used for this population and systematically evaluates their effects on sleep outcomes. Research Design and Methods: Six databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) were systematically searched for studies evaluating nonpharmacological interventions and reporting sleep outcomes in informal dementia caregivers. Two researchers independently selected studies and assessed quality. Results: Of 4,147 records identified, 30 studies were synthesized and 22 meta-analyzed. Seven intervention categories were identified: multicomponent behavioral sleep interventions, sensory-based interventions, physical exercise, institutional respite care, cranial electrical stimulation, caregiver education, and nighttime monitoring systems. Pooled analyses indicated nonpharmacological interventions significantly improved overall sleep quality (SMD = −0.60, 95% CI = −1.12 to −0.08) and insomnia (SMD = −0.43, 95% CI = −0.83 to –0.04). Multicomponent behavioral interventions specifically improved overall sleep quality (SMD = −0.36, 95% CI = −0.61 to −0.12). Research on other specific sleep parameters remains limited. Discussion and Implications: Nonpharmacological interventions may effectively improve overall sleep quality and insomnia among informal caregivers of people with dementia. However, significant research gaps persist regarding the effectiveness of these interventions in improving specific sleep parameters. Since heterogeneity among the included studies remains high, caution is warranted when interpreting the results in practice. Future large-scale and methodologically rigorous trials are needed.