Health literacy (HL) allows people to access, understand and evaluate health information. Informal caregivers’ levels of HL may impact long-term care outcomes. ‘Informal caregivers’ profile in Lisbon county: a health community approach’ is a nurse-led research project aiming to assess informal caregivers’ health literacy and associated factors in Lisbon county, as well as to foster the development of a local-specific health literacy strategy. A survey to identify a health/social caregiver profile, including questions about HL (HLS-EU-PT), was submitted to a representative sample of carers. Descriptive and bivariate inferential analysis was developed. Informal caregivers’ level of HL was mostly sufficient (n = 99, 38%). More than 60% of caregivers have limited HL regarding health promotion. ‘Access’, ‘Appraisal’ and ‘Use’ are the information processing stages with lower mean scores of HL. Carers with low HL levels appear to be older and to have less education, low knowledge of community resources and decreased wellbeing (p < 0.05). A strategy focused on health promotion-related HL through primary care resources can potentially improve caregivers’ knowledge, competencies and motivation, as well as health system sustainability. Reported HLS-EU-PT scores deserve special attention. Future work should emphasize the role of HL-associated factors and health outcomes for caregivers and cared-for persons.

Background/Objectives: Individualized nursing care allows for systematic assessment and intervention; considers a patient’s preferences, values, and context; and contributes to a positive care trajectory. However, its operationalization has proven to be challenging. This research aimed to evaluate nurses’ perceptions of individualized care and analyze their relationship with sociodemographic variables. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 122 eligible and registered nurses at a Hospital Center, in the Ophthalmology (operating room and inpatient ward) service, the Cardiology service, the Internal Medicine service, and the Medical Emergency Unit, for adults/older adults in Portugal. The nursing version of the Individualized Care Scale (ICS-Nurse) was used for the assessment, including three sub-dimensions: clinical situation, personal life situation, and decisional control over care-related decisions. Cronbach’s alpha and principal component analysis were used for the data analysis. The STROBE checklist was used to report this study. Results: No statistically significant differences were found based on the age, gender, level of education, or years of professional experience of the nurses within the sub-dimensions of individualization. The nurses overall had a good perception of the importance of individualized care (4.06 ± 0.46 ICS-A-NURSE) but faced difficulties in its implementation during the last shift they worked (3.97 ± 0.49 ICS-B-NURSE). Conclusions: The items considered to be of greatest importance were the response to the physical and emotional needs arising from illness and assistance in decision-making through educational instructions. Aspects related to the personal lives of patients, such as family inclusion in an individual’s care plan, everyday habits, and previous experiences of hospitalization, received the lowest scores. Recognizing priority areas for improvement in the individualization of nursing care can contribute to developing training programs and policies that promote a holistic approach. Future studies should consider patient outcomes related to their needs for individualization.

Introduction: Staff shortages following the pandemic and the growing complexity of healthcare require continuous reflection on the part of professionals to improve patient protection efforts in high-pressure environments. This makes it essential to better understand and reinforce the role of patient advocacy in clinical practice. This study aims to map the concept of patient advocacy in nursing, identifying its key attributes, antecedents, and consequences in acute and perioperative settings, contributing to its update and integration into the current healthcare paradigm. Methods: A scoping review, based on Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, analyzed studies from 2019 to 2024, across CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. It focused on nursing-related patient advocacy in acute and perioperative settings, excluding non-nursing roles, self-advocacy, and non-research articles. Two independent reviewers independently selected 14 studies using Rayyan®. Results: Key attributes of patient advocacy include safeguarding, effective communication, empowerment, and ethical decision-making support. Facilitating antecedents were professional motivation, training, nurse autonomy, and spiritual care, while hindering factors included ineffective communication, religious/cultural conflicts, and gaps in patients’ health literacy. The consequences were mostly positive for patients, such as empowerment and shared decisions, and mixed for nurses, ranging from moral distress and frustration to gratitude and professional satisfaction. Conclusion: This study synthesized the evolving conceptualizations of patient advocacy, addressing post-pandemic challenges and reinforcing the importance of communication, ethical support, and training. It revealed emerging facilitators and previously overlooked barriers, highlighting the need for stronger policies and organizational structures to empower nurses and safeguard patients.