Background/Objectives: Several Italian regions have started to introduce the Family and Community Nurse model. The aim of this study was to describe the facilitating and hindering factors that have influenced the implementation of the model by analyzing regional policies from the perspective of nurses appointed as Family and Community Nurses. Methods: A qualitative study from 2023 to 2024 following the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. Nurses attending a training course were eligible (N = 68) and multi-method data collection was used. Mandatory written project works were requested at the end of the course, and interviews conducted after six months with 14 purposively selected nurses were used. The data were subjected to content analysis. The factors identified were categorized by level (nurse, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem) and by the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Results: A total of 23 facilitating factors and 20 hindering factors were identified across all levels and four domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation required nurses to shift from a task-oriented to a user-oriented approach to care that emphasizes accountability and citizen needs. Facilitating factors were the availability of advanced competencies, digital skills, familiarity with communities, and effective teamwork supported by leaders. Challenges arose from fragmented systems and unmet community expectations. Strengthening cross-sector collaboration, fostering trust, and engaging third sector resources were critical factors hindering holistic, patient-centred care. Conclusions: The Family and Community Nurses model promotes integrated, patient-centred care through proactive approaches that require advanced competence and interprofessional collaboration. Training, leadership support, and the removal of systemic barriers are critical. Future research should focus on integrating the identified factors into strategies to optimize the implementation of the Family and Community Nurses model.

Topical anesthetics such as 4% Lidocaine and Eutectic Mixture of Local Anesthetics (EMLA) are used for venipuncture and intravenous (IV) cannulation. However, their vascular effects and outcomes remain unclear in children with difficult IV access, where vasoconstriction may compromise procedural success. To assess and compare (a) changes in venous area before and after application of 4% Lidocaine and EMLA, (b) skin blanching, (c) procedural pain, and (d) children's collaboration during procedures. Retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 88 children (aged 1 month to 16 years) at a tertiary hospital: 44 received 4% lidocaine (November 2024) and 44 EMLA (October 2019). Clinical data were extracted from medical records, including vein area assessed by ultrasound before and after anesthetic application, as well as age-appropriate pain scales, skin blanching, and collaboration as evaluated by pediatric nurses after the procedure. Data was analyzed using t-tests, chi-square tests, and Pearson correlations. Both anesthetics reduced venous area; EMLA produced greater vasoconstriction (-26.28% vs -3.27%, p = .002) and skin blanching (72.73% vs 25%, p < .001) than 4% Lidocaine. Pain was low in both groups (p = .07). Children who received EMLA showed higher collaboration (97.73% vs 75%, p < .001). This study contributes to pediatric nursing science by providing objective, ultrasound-based evidence on the vascular effects of commonly used topical anesthetics and supports nurses' clinical decision-making in venous access management. These findings help pediatric nurses choose optimal topical anesthetics, improving venous access and reducing procedural pain.