The maintenance of physical distance, the absence of relatives and the relocation of registered nurses to COVID-19 units presumably affects nursing care at non-COVID-19 units. Using a qualitative design, this study explored registered nurses’ experiences of how COVID-19 influenced nursing care in non-COVID-19 units at a Danish university hospital during the first wave of the virus. The study is reported using the COREQ checklist. The analysis offered two findings: (1) the challenge of an increased workload for registered nurses remaining in non-COVID-19 units and (2) the difficulty of navigating the contradictory needs for both closeness to and distance from patients. The study concluded that several factors challenged nursing care in non-COVID-19 units during the COVID-19 pandemic. These may have decreased the amount of contact between patients and registered nurses, which may have contributed to a task-oriented approach to nursing care, leading to missed nursing care.

Provision of physical health care to people diagnosed with severe mental illness is widely reported as inadequate. This interview study explored perspectives of a group of key informants on current practices of providing physical health care within two mental health care settings in Denmark. Thematic analysis of their accounts provided insights into 1) barriers to the provision of physical health care in mental health settings, and 2) possible solutions to overcome existing barriers. Negative attitudes and limited specialist health care knowledge among mental health care professionals constituted serious barriers. To effectively address these barriers, mental health services need to be reoriented towards the prioritisation of physical health alongside mental health. This will require equipping mental health professionals with relevant knowledge and skills and organisational resources, to effectively work with people experiencing or at risk of physical comorbidities.

Aims: To describe the development and refinement of the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice through stakeholder feedback. The tool, based on the Fundamentals of Care Framework, supports healthcare leaders and clinicians in assessing fundamental care in a practical and user‐friendly manner that embraces rather than minimises the inherent complexity of this care delivery as it occurs in practice. Design: Multi‐method study informed by participatory action principles. Methods: Data collection involved an anonymous online survey and cognitive interviews with key stakeholders internationally to gauge perspectives on the clarity, usability, and acceptability of the tool. Data were collected between October–December 2023. Quantitative, categorical data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analysed via content analysis. Results: Participants described the Tool as Comprehensive, Practical, and Useful. Participants liked the visual representation of results in the form of bar and radar diagrams, which aided in interpreting the outcomes. The main suggestions for improvement were: (1) Simplifying items relating to the ‘Context of Care’ dimension of the Fundamentals of Care Framework; (2) Reducing similarity between some items; (3) Separating or simplifying items with multiple components; and (4) Clarifying terminology. Conclusion: Based on stakeholder feedback, the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice is now digitised and includes a comprehensive instruction manual and definitions for each element of the Fundamentals of Care Framework assessed within the tool. The tool supports healthcare leaders and clinicians to assess fundamental care delivery at multiple levels—individual, team, unit/ward, organisational—identifying areas of strength and improvement to inform decision‐making, planning, and quality improvement. The tool offers a way of assessing fundamental care holistically as a multi‐dimensional construct rather than as a series of disaggregated tasks, better reflecting and capturing the complex reality of fundamental care delivery. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: The Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice supports real‐time feedback (i.e., immediate visualisation of results), facilitating its integration in clinical practice to support enhanced fundamental care delivery. Impact: Seeking stakeholder feedback has enhanced the relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice, facilitating its use as a decision‐making and planning tool to support improved fundamental care delivery across clinical settings. Reporting Method: This study is reported using the CROSS and SRQR guidelines. Patient or Public Contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution.

The context of care in assertive community treatment (ACT) can be precarious and generate ethical issues involving the principles of autonomy and paternalism. This focus group study examined case managers’ situated accounts of moral reasoning. Our findings show how they expressed strong moral obligation towards helping the clients. Their moral reasoning reflected a paternalistic position where, on different occasions, the potential benefits of their interventions would be prioritised at the expense of protecting the clients’ personal autonomy. The case managers’ reasoning emphasised situational awareness, but there was a risk of supporting paternalistic interventions and denying the clients’ right to autonomy.

This study aims to explore how a changed COVID-19 work environment influences nurses’ clinical decision-making. Data were collected via three focus groups totaling 14 nurses working in COVID-19 pandemic wards at a Danish university hospital. The factors influencing decision-making are described in three themes; navigating in a COVID-19 dominated context, recognizing the importance of collegial fellowship, and the complexities of feeling competent. A strong joint commitment among the nurses to manage critical situations fostered a culture of knowledge-sharing and drawing on colleagues’ competencies in clinical decision-making. It is important for nurse leaders to consider multiple factors when preparing nurses not only to work in changing work environments, but also when nurses are asked to work in environments and specialties that deviate from their usual routines.