Aim: To explore the current state of the science on influencing factors of acute care nursing professional identity.Design: Integrative review.Methods: Data were collected and screened using Covidence systematic review software, adhering to pre‐defined inclusion criteria. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist was used for critical appraisal, and content analysis was applied to analyse the data.Data Sources: CINAHL, PsycINFO and PubMed were utilised to search literature published between 2018 and 2023.Results: A total of 18 articles were included. Five themes were identified: (1) internal influences; (2) external influences; (3) externalisation of role; (4) early versus seasoned career experiences and (5) barriers to professional identity formation.Conclusion: This review found evidence of multiple influencing factors, predominantly external, shaping acute care nurse professional identity. Research on the long‐term impacts on practice, management, policy and education remains limited.Implications: Enablers to forming professional identity foster empowerment, confidence, belonging and job satisfaction. Barriers to formation lead to hesitation, performance impediments, stress and exhaustion. Development of nurse professional identity may be instrumental in tackling acute care workforce challenges.Impact: Review findings on professional identity formation can guide initiatives for enhancing healthy work environments and workforce retention. This exploration has international contemporary relevance for the nursing profession with suggestions for future research.Impact Statement: Existing literature underscores the significance of professional identity in nursing, yet the mechanisms underlying its integration and maintenance in the contemporary acute care workforce remain unclear. In the context of overwhelming workloads that adversely affect nurse mental health and retention, coupled with the escalating nursing shortage as we emerge from the pandemic, this examination of professional identity formation holds contemporary relevance for the evolving acute care landscape, offering implications for future research. The insights gleaned from this review may guide organisational leaders in developing new strategies addressing acute care nurse management, policy, education and retention.Reporting Method: Reporting adheres to the EQUATOR network, ENTREQ guidelines.Patient or Public Contribution: None.

This study examined the impact of federal regulatory changes on methadone and buprenorphine treatment during COVID-19 in Arizona. A cohort study of methadone and buprenorphine providers from September 14, 2021 to April 15, 2022 measured the proportion of 6 treatment accommodations implemented at 3 time periods: before COVID-19, during Arizona's COVID-19 shutdown, and at the time of the survey completion. Accommodations included (1) telehealth, (2) telehealth buprenorphine induction, (3) increased multiday dosing, (4) license reciprocity, (5) home medications delivery, and (6) off-site dispensing. A multilevel model assessed the association of treatment setting, rurality, and treatment with accommodation implementation time. Over half (62.2%) of the 74-provider sample practiced in healthcare settings not primarily focused on addiction treatment, 19% practiced in methadone clinics, and 19% practiced in treatment clinics not offering methadone. Almost half (43%) were unaware of the regulatory changes allowing treatment accommodation. Telehealth was most frequently reported, increasing from 30% before COVID-19 to 80% at the time of the survey. Multiday dosing was the only accommodation substantially retracted after COVID-19 shutdown: from 41% to 23% at the time of the survey. Providers with higher patient limits were 2.5–3.2 times as likely to implement telehealth services, 4.4 times as likely to implement buprenorphine induction through telehealth, and 15.2–20.9 times as likely to implement license reciprocity as providers with lower patient limits. Providers of methadone implemented 12% more accommodations and maintained a higher average proportion of implemented accommodations during the COVID-19 shutdown period but were more likely to reduce the proportion of implemented accommodations (a 17-percentage point gap by the time of the survey). Federal regulatory changes are not sufficient to produce a substantive or sustained impact on provider accommodations, especially in methadone medical treatment settings. Practice change interventions specific to treatment settings should be implemented and studied for their impact.

Background: Ending the HIV Epidemic is a campaign dedicated to reducing new HIV infections in the United States by 90% by 2030. Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) holds significant promise as a prevention tool. However, uptake has not improved much since then. As a result, this research looked at how PrEP literacy relates to sexual communication self-efficacy Methods: Between August 4 and 21, 2020, we performed a community-informed cross-sectional study of Black and Latino residents in Indiana. We collected demographic information as well as PrEP literacy, sexual communication self-efficacy, and awareness of HIV status. Results: Being unaware of one’s own HIV status and being unsure of one’s sexual identity were both linked to reduced self-efficacy in the domain of sex communication. Those who had a greater level of PrEP literacy felt more confident in their ability to communicate with others about sexually related topics. People living in rural areas showed a significantly lower degree of sexual communication self-efficacy than participants in urban settings. Conclusion: Providing information about PrEP to those at risk of acquiring the virus may help them connect with treatment or prevention services. Healthcare professionals should take the time to understand their patients’ levels of PrEP literacy and communication self-efficacy regarding sexual health.

Purpose: The Institute of Medicine has suggested that teaching health care providers to inquire about and document the sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) of their patients will provide more accurate epidemiological data and allow for more patient-centered care, thus improving sexual and gender minority health. The purpose of this study was to determine whether medical students are asking about SOGI and to identify reasons why students were opting not to ask. Methods: In July 2020, an online survey was made available to second-, third-, and fourth-year medical students at a Midwestern medical school. Respondents were asked whether they consistently inquired about the SOGI of their patients, and the reasons they do not ask. The number of students asking about SOGI and reasons for not asking were analyzed using chi-square analyses as a function of year in training. Results: Of 1089 eligible participants, 364 completed the survey (33.4%). The number of students asking about sexual orientation significantly decreased with every year of training (92.8%, 82.2%, and 52.7%). The number of students asking about gender identity significantly decreased after the second year of training (69.9%, 40.6%, and 26.4%). Reasons that significantly increased across training included believing SOGI is irrelevant to encounters, limiting inquiries to patients with sexual health complaints only, and negative influence from their attendings. Conclusion: As medical students progressed into the clinical years of their training, they were less likely to ask their patients about SOGI and more likely to cite negative influence from their attendings and question the relevance of obtaining SOGI.