Background: The rapid evolution of the epidemiological picture and the recent SARS-COV-2 pandemic has expressed the vulnerabilities of health systems and focuses attention on the population’s needs. The nurse’s figure in the care teams is universally identified; however, the implementation of the role within some care settings turns out to be complex and challenging. This integrative review aims to identify the barriers and facilitators in implementing the role of the nurse in primary care settings. Methods: An integrative review was conducted on the Medline and Cinahl databases until 9 June 2020. Qualitative, quantitative, and Mixed-method research studies were selected to identify studies related to the barriers and facilitators of the nurse’s role in nursing facilities’ primary care. For the extraction of the results, the Consolidating Framework for Research Implementation (CFIR) was used to identify the factors that influence implementation in health care. Results: Following the duplicates’ removal, the search identified 18,257 articles, of which 56 were relevant to the inclusion criteria; therefore, they were included in the summary. The selected studies were conducted in thirteen countries, most from Oceania, Europe, North America, Latin America, and the Caribbean. The barriers reported most frequently concern the nursing profession’s regulatory and regulatory aspects within the contexts of care, cultural and organizational aspects, training, and the transfer of specific skills, which were previously designated to doctors. The facilitators are mainly linked to the nurse’s adaptability to the various contexts of care, recognizing the patient’s role, and the desire to develop multidisciplinary and effective working groups to respond to the health needs of the population in primary care contexts. Conclusion: This review highlighted the main barriers and facilitators in implementing the nurse’s role in primary care settings. These results offer useful elements for stakeholders to identify effective strategies in preparing programs and activities for implementing the nurse’s role, acting on the elements identified as barriers and favouring the aspects that emerge as facilitators.

Maintaining good oral hygiene is essential for preventing and managing oral health problems. This systematic review aimed to identify and assess clinical practice guidelines on oral hygiene, focusing on quality and key areas. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane, and organizational websites. Guidelines from health organizations that focused on oral health, hygiene education, and disease prevention were included. Guidelines based on expert opinions and those focusing on specific pathologies were excluded. The AGREE II tool was used to evaluate quality, and a narrative synthesis summarized recommendations across pediatric, adult, and senior age groups. Nine studies were reviewed. Results showed that electric toothbrushes do not significantly outperform manual ones in preventing cavities, though they may reduce plaque. Fluoride toothpaste is less effective if followed by rinsing with water. For adults, mouthwashes with chlorhexidine or sodium fluoride are recommended. Checkups every six months are advised for healthy children and adults. Proper denture care is also emphasized. Regular updates to oral care guidelines are necessary, as oral health affects essential functions and social well‐being.

Background: Flushing and locking of totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) is recommended to maintain their patency when not in use. Although manufacturers’ recommendations indicate monthly access for TIVAD maintenance, there is a tendency in real life to prolong this interval. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of prolonged versus short flushing and locking intervals to prevent TIVAD occlusions in adults with cancer. Methods: A systematic search was carried out in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently selected studies, assessed quality, and extracted data. Study findings were summarized, and a meta-analysis conducted. Results: Six articles were included in the review, with a total of 1255 participants. Differences in types of cancers, flushing and locking techniques, and volume and concentration of heparin were described. Pooled results from 4 studies showed fewer catheter occlusions in favor of prolonged flushing and locking intervals (relative risk, 0.81), even if not statistically significant (95% confidence interval, 0.41–1.61) with no heterogeneity among studies (I ² = 0.00%, P = .69). The quality of evidence was very low. Conclusions: Very low-quality evidence suggests that prolonged schedule flushing and locking intervals has no effect on catheter patency. However, because of low number and poor quality of evidence derived from the studies analyzed, findings of this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution. Implications for Practice: No statistically significant difference in occlusion rate between short and long timing of flushing was found. However, further studies are necessary to strengthen the safe implementation of longer intervals in clinical practice.

To assess the effects of bed rest duration on short-term complications following transfemoral catheterization. A systematic search was carried out in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, SciELO and in five registries of grey literature. Randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies comparing different durations of bed rest after transfemoral catheterization were included. Primary outcomes were haematoma and bleeding near the access site. Secondary outcomes were arteriovenous fistula, pseudoaneurysm, back pain, general patient discomfort and urinary discomfort. Study findings were summarized using a network meta-analysis (NMA). Twenty-eight studies and 9217 participants were included (mean age 60.4 years). In NMA, bed rest duration was not consistently associated with either primary outcome, and this was confirmed in sensitivity analyses. There was no evidence of associations with secondary outcomes, except for two effects related to back pain. A bed rest duration of 2–2.9 h was associated with lower risk of back pain [risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17–0.62] and a duration over 12 h with greater risk of back pain (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.16–3.24), when compared with the 4–5.9 h interval. Post hoc analysis revealed an increased risk of back pain per hour of bed rest (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04–1.11). A short bed rest was not associated with complications in patients undergoing transfemoral catheterization; the greater the duration of bed rest, the more likely the patients were to experience back pain. Ambulation as early as 2 h after transfemoral catheterization can be safely implemented. PROSPERO: CRD42014014222.

The aim of the study was to explore the effects of Intentional Rounding, a regular-based proactive patient monitoring, on falls and pressure ulcers in internal medicine units. This is a cluster-randomised controlled study, where units were assigned (1:1) to Intentional Rounding (intervention group) or Standard of Care (control group). The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of falls and new pressure ulcers. These events were considered separately as secondary endpoints, together with the number of bell calls and the evaluation of patient satisfaction. Primary analyses were carried out on the modified intention-to-treat population (hospitalisation of at least 10 days). Recruitment occurred between October 2019 and March 2020, at which time the study was prematurely closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Enrolment totalled 1822 patients at 26 sites; 779 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The intervention group had a lower risk of falls (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.02–0.78; p = 0.03). There were no statistical differences in new pressure ulcers or the cumulative incidence of both adverse events. Mean bell calls for each patient were 15.4 ± 24.1 in the intervention group and 13.7 ± 20.5 in the control group (p = 0.38). Additionally, patient satisfaction in the intervention group was almost at the maximum level. Our study supports the usefulness of Intentional Rounding in a complex and vulnerable population such as that hospitalised in internal medicine units.