INTRODUCTION: Existing advance care planning (ACP) definitional frameworks apply to individuals with decision‐making capacity. We aimed to conceptualize ACP for dementia in terms of its definition and issues that deserve particular attention.METHODS: Delphi study with phases: (A) adaptation of a generic ACP framework by a task force of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC); (B) four online surveys by 107 experts from 33 countries, September 2021 to June 2022; (C) approval by the EAPC board.RESULTS: ACP in dementia was defined as a communication process adapted to the person's capacity, which includes, and is continued with, family if available. We identified pragmatic boundaries regarding participation and time (i.e., current or end‐of‐life care). Three interrelated issues that deserve particular attention were capacity, family, and engagement and communication.DISCUSSION: A communication and relationship‐centered definitional framework of ACP in dementia evolved through international consensus supporting inclusiveness of persons with dementia and their family.Highlights: This article offers a consensus definitional framework of advance care planning in dementia. The definition covers all stages of capacity and includes family caregivers. Particularly important are (1) capacity, (2) family, (3) engagement, and communication. Fluctuating capacity was visualized in relation to roles and engaging stakeholders.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a severe impact on nursing care. This cross-sectional survey-based study compared aspects of nursing care and nurses’ satisfaction with care provided before and during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 936 registered nurses (RNs) rated the frequency with which they performed fundamental care, nursing techniques, patient education, symptom management, and nurse–patient relationships before and during the pandemic. A recursive partitioning for ordered multivariate response in a conditional inference framework approach was applied. More frequent fundamental cares were associated with their frequency before the pandemic (p < 0.001), caring for COVID-19 patients (p < 0.001), and workplace reassignment (p = 0.004). Caring for COVID-19 patients (p < 0.001), workplace reassignment (p = 0.030), and caring for ≤7.4 COVID-19 patients (p = 0.014) increased nursing techniques. RNs in high-intensity COVID-19 units (p = 0.002) who educated patients before the pandemic, stopped this task. RNs caring for COVID-19 patients reported increased symptom management (p < 0.001), as did RNs caring for more non-COVID-19 patients (p = 0.037). Less frequent nurse–patient relationships before the pandemic and working in high-intensity COVID-19 units decreased nurse–patient relationships (p = 0.002). Despite enormous challenges, nurses continued to provide a high level of care. Ensuring the appropriate deployment and education of nurses is crucial to personalize care and to maintain nurses’ satisfaction with the care provided.

Background: Despite its association with patient safety, few studies on missed nursing care have been conducted in nursing homes. We aimed to describe individual and environmental factors in a sample of registered nurses (RNs) reporting missed nursing care in nursing homes, and to explore the association between these factors and missed nursing care. Methods: In the present, multicentre cross-sectional study, 217 RNs from 43 nursing homes in Northern Italy reported all episodes of missed nursing care (ie, any aspect of required care that was omitted or delayed) that occurred in the 20 most dependent residents (according to RNs’ judgement; 860 residents in total) over 3 consecutive days. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression models were used to test possible explanatory factors of missed nursing care (individual, work-related, organisational, and work environment factors), which were entered in a step-wise manner. Results: Younger RNs (P=.026), freelance RNs (P=.046), RNs with a permanent contract (P=.035), and those working in publicly-owned nursing homes reported more episodes of missed nursing care (P<.012). Public ownership (odds ratio [OR]=9.88; 95% CI 2.22–44.03; P=.003), a higher proportion of residents with severe clinical conditions (OR=2.45; 95% CI 1.12–5.37; P=.025), a lower proportion of RNs (OR=2.24; 95% CI 1.10–4.54; P=.026), and perceived lack of time to care for residents (OR=2.33; 95% CI 1.04–5.26; P=.041) were statistically significantly associated with missed nursing care. Conclusion: Factors associated with missed nursing care are similar in hospitals and nursing homes, and include heavy workload and perceived lack of time for care. Because missed nursing care in nursing homes represents tasks performed specifically by RNs, missed nursing care in this setting should be measured in terms of these tasks. An optimal skill mix is crucial to guarantee not only comfort and basic care for nursing home residents, but also good outcomes for residents with severe clinical conditions.

This meta-analysis of RCTs aimed to determine whether replacing face-to-face hospital care with telemedicine deteriorates psychosocial outcomes of adult cancer patients, in terms of quality of life (QoL), anxiety, distress, and depression. RCTs on interventions aimed at improving patient psychosocial outcomes were excluded. MEDLINE, EmBASE, and PsycInfo were searched on 13 May 2022 without language or date restrictions. In total, 1400 records were identified and 8 RCTs included (4434 subjects). Study methodological quality was moderate. Statistically significant improvements were observed in favor of the intervention for QoL (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.43, p = 0.04), anxiety (SMD = −0.17, 95% CI −0.30 to −0.04, p < 0.01), and global distress (SMD = −0.38, 95% CI −0.51 to −0.25, p < 0.01). A meta-analysis on depression could not be performed. In subgroup analyses, the intervention appeared to be more beneficial for patients receiving active treatment vs. follow-up, for “other cancer types” vs. breast cancer, and for “other modes of administration” vs. telephone. Given the many potential advantages of being assisted at home, telemedicine appears to be a viable option in oncology. However, more research is necessary to determine the types of patients who may benefit the most from these alternative care modalities.

. Advance care planning (ACP) is relevant yet challenging with cognitive decline. . To provide evidence and consensus-based clinical recommendations for how to conduct ACP in dementia. . International Delphi study conducted by the European Association for Palliative Care 'ACP in dementia' taskforce with four online surveys (September 2021-June 2022). A panel of 107 experts from 33 countries and seven individuals with dementia contributed. The recommendations specific for dementia were initially based on two earlier Delphi studies and literature searches addressing guidance including the right timing and how to personalize ACP. We used conservative pre-registered criteria for consensus. . Thirty constitutive elements of ACP were identified (e.g., 'assess understanding of ACP'). Only five were deemed 'optional.' The panel estimated a median of four conversations could address elements to be addressed at least once. Recommendations included to assume capacity as a principle, conscious of the need to explore its fluctuation, to encourage engaging and playing active roles, and to establish connection and inform and prepare family. There was a consensus to offer ACP around dementia diagnosis, to raise end-of-life issues later, and to personalize ACP with flexibility, providing of information and exploring understanding. The advice of the persons with dementia pointed to a wish for a well-coordinated holistic approach. . Consensus was reached, including in areas of ambiguity, to guide ACP in dementia. ACP should be embedded in a non-prescriptive, individualized approach that involves both the person with dementia and their families. Future studies may evaluate trade-offs between optimal ACP and feasible implementation.

Psychosocial morbidity can have negative consequences for cancer patients, including maladaptive coping, poor treatment adherence, and lower quality of life. Evidence shows that psychosocial interventions can positively impact quality of life, as well as symptoms and side effects; however, they are not always offered to patients who might benefit from them. These guidelines were produced by a multidisciplinary panel of 16 experts, including patients, following GRADE methodology. The panel framed clinical questions and voted on outcomes to investigate. Studies identified by rigorous search strategies were assessed to rate certainty of evidence, and recommendations were formulated by the panel. Although the quality of the evidence found was generally moderate, interventions could be recommended aimed at improving patient information, communication with healthcare professionals and involvement in decision-making; detecting and managing patient psychosocial needs, particularly with non-pharmacological therapy; and supporting families of patients with advanced cancer. The role of nurses as providers of information and psychosocial care is stressed. Most recommended interventions do not appear to necessitate new services or infrastructures, and therefore do not require allocation of additional resources, but predominantly involve changes in clinical staff behavior and/or ward organization. Patients should be made aware of psychosocial care standards so that they can expect to receive them.