CRISPR/Cas9 (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats associated with protein 9) was first identified as a component of the bacterial adaptive immune system and subsequently engineered into a genome-editing tool. The key breakthrough in this field came with the realization that CRISPR/Cas9 could be used in mammalian cells to enable transformative genetic editing. This technology has since become a vital tool for various genetic manipulations, including gene knockouts, knock-in point mutations, and gene regulation at both transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels. CRISPR/Cas9 holds great potential in human medicine, particularly for curing genetic disorders. However, despite significant innovation and advancement in genome editing, the technology still possesses critical limitations, such as off-target effects, immunogenicity issues, ethical considerations, regulatory hurdles, and the need for efficient delivery methods. To overcome these obstacles, efforts have focused on creating more accurate and reliable Cas9 nucleases and exploring innovative delivery methods. Recently, functional biomaterials and synthetic carriers have shown great potential as effective delivery vehicles for CRISPR/Cas9 components. In this review, we attempt to provide a comprehensive survey of the existing CRISPR-Cas9 delivery strategies, including viral delivery, biomaterials-based delivery, synthetic carriers, and physical delivery techniques. We underscore the urgent need for effective delivery systems to fully unlock the power of CRISPR/Cas9 technology and realize a seamless transition from benchtop research to clinical applications.

Purpose: This study explored the perceptions of medical–surgical nurses in Kazakhstan who provide care for patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). It aimed to illuminate the clinical, emotional, and organizational complexities of multimorbidity care and to identify coping strategies that sustain nurses’ resilience and professional integrity. Design and Methods: A qualitative descriptive approach was adopted to capture nurses’ experiential realities in dynamic care settings. Data were collected through semistructured interviews and focus groups with 18 nurses from diverse medical–surgical units between March and June 2025. Reflexive thematic analysis guided the interpretation of data, ensuring methodological rigor and contextual depth. Findings: Four interrelated themes emerged: (1) Clinical complexity and care demands —highlighting cognitive overload and procedural intensity in MCC management; (2) Emotional and psychological impact —revealing compassion fatigue, moral distress, and hidden emotional labor; (3) Coping and resilience strategies —demonstrating adaptive mechanisms such as reflection, meaning‐making, and continuous learning; and (4) Systemic and institutional support —underscoring the influence of staffing, technology, recognition, and access to psychological care on nurses’ well‐being and effectiveness. Together, these findings illustrate the duality of empowerment and exhaustion inherent in chronic care nursing. Conclusions: Nurses play a pivotal yet underrecognized role in bridging policy aspirations and the lived realities of multimorbidity care. Their capacity to sustain compassion and clinical precision amid structural constraints exemplifies both professional resilience and systemic vulnerability. Nurses in Kazakhstan bridge the gap between policy and practice through “cultural resilience,” yet this comes at a high cost of “silent endurance” and internalized moral distress. Clinical Relevance: Enhancing institutional recognition, psychosocial support, and ongoing professional development is essential to sustaining nurse well‐being and ensuring high‐quality, person‐centered care for individuals living with MCCs. Implications for Nursing Practice and Policy: This study highlights that resilience in the Kazakhstani nursing workforce is currently sustained at a high personal cost to the individual nurse. Policy efforts must move beyond universal burnout interventions to address the specific “professional paradox” identified here. This requires a fundamental shift where “cultural resilience” and emotional labor are recognized as legitimate professional work that requires institutional support, rather than remaining as an unspoken expectation of self‐sacrifice. Furthermore, this study highlights the pressing need to enhance both professional and emotional support for nurses caring for patients with MCCs. Healthcare organizations should prioritize adequate staffing, equitable task distribution, and access to psychological assistance to lessen burnout and emotional fatigue. Creating space for reflective debriefing, peer collaboration, and continuous learning on multimorbidity care would help sustain nurses’ well‐being and professional confidence. At the policy level, stronger acknowledgment of nurses’ emotional contributions and clinical expertise is crucial. National health strategies should embed workforce development initiatives, equitable compensation, and leadership pathways that give nurses a greater voice in shaping healthcare decisions. Introducing well‐designed technologies and streamlined documentation systems can reduce administrative strain and improve care coordination. By reinforcing supportive structures and valuing nursing expertise, healthcare systems can foster a resilient, motivated workforce that delivers safer, more compassionate care to individuals living with complex chronic conditions.