This review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of evidence for the use of clinical and quality dashboards in health care environments. A literature search was performed for the dates 1996-2012 on CINAHL, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, Science Direct and ACM Digital Library. A citation search and a hand search of relevant papers were also conducted. One hundred and twenty two full text papers were retrieved of which 11 were included in the review. There was considerable heterogeneity in implementation setting, dashboard users and indicators used. There was evidence that in contexts where dashboards were easily accessible to clinicians (such as in the form of a screen saver) their use was associated with improved care processes and patient outcomes. There is some evidence that implementing clinical and/or quality dashboards that provide immediate access to information for clinicians can improve adherence to quality guidelines and may help improve patient outcomes. However, further high quality detailed research studies need to be conducted to obtain evidence of their efficacy and establish guidelines for their design.

Aim: This paper discusses the critical determinants of pressure ulcer development and proposes a new pressure ulcer conceptual framework.Background: Recent work to develop and validate a new evidence‐based pressure ulcer risk assessment framework was undertaken. This formed part of a Pressure UlceR Programme Of reSEarch (RP‐PG‐0407‐10056), funded by the National Institute for Health Research. The foundation for the risk assessment component incorporated a systematic review and a consensus study that highlighted the need to propose a new conceptual framework.Design: Discussion Paper.Data Sources: The new conceptual framework links evidence from biomechanical, physiological and epidemiological evidence, through use of data from a systematic review (search conducted March 2010), a consensus study (conducted December 2010–2011) and an international expert group meeting (conducted December 2011).Implications for Nursing: A new pressure ulcer conceptual framework incorporating key physiological and biomechanical components and their impact on internal strains, stresses and damage thresholds is proposed. Direct and key indirect causal factors suggested in a theoretical causal pathway are mapped to the physiological and biomechanical components of the framework. The new proposed conceptual framework provides the basis for understanding the critical determinants of pressure ulcer development and has the potential to influence risk assessment guidance and practice. It could also be used to underpin future research to explore the role of individual risk factors conceptually and operationally.Conclusion: By integrating existing knowledge from epidemiological, physiological and biomechanical evidence, a theoretical causal pathway and new conceptual framework are proposed with potential implications for practice and research.

There is evidence of under-detection and poor management of pain in patients with dementia, in both long-term and acute care. Accurate assessment of pain in people with dementia is challenging and pain assessment tools have received considerable attention over the years, with an increasing number of tools made available. Systematic reviews on the evidence of their validity and utility mostly compare different sets of tools. This review of systematic reviews analyses and summarises evidence concerning the psychometric properties and clinical utility of pain assessment tools in adults with dementia or cognitive impairment. We searched for systematic reviews of pain assessment tools providing evidence of reliability, validity and clinical utility. Two reviewers independently assessed each review and extracted data from them, with a third reviewer mediating when consensus was not reached. Analysis of the data was carried out collaboratively. The reviews were synthesised using a narrative synthesis approach. We retrieved 441 potentially eligible reviews, 23 met the criteria for inclusion and 8 provided data for extraction. Each review evaluated between 8 and 13 tools, in aggregate providing evidence on a total of 28 tools. The quality of the reviews varied and the reporting often lacked sufficient methodological detail for quality assessment. The 28 tools appear to have been studied in a variety of settings and with varied types of patients. The reviews identified several methodological limitations across the original studies. The lack of a ‘gold standard’ significantly hinders the evaluation of tools’ validity. Most importantly, the samples were small providing limited evidence for use of any of the tools across settings or populations. There are a considerable number of pain assessment tools available for use with the elderly cognitive impaired population. However there is limited evidence about their reliability, validity and clinical utility. On the basis of this review no one tool can be recommended given the existing evidence.

The Future of Home Health project sought to support transformation of home health and home-based care to meet the needs of patients in the evolving U.S. health care system. Interviews with key thought leaders and stakeholders resulted in key themes about the future of home health care. By synthesizing this qualitative research, a literature review, case studies, and the themes from a 2014 Institute of Medicine and National Research Council workshop on “The Future of Home Health Care,” the authors articulate a vision for home-based care and recommend a bold framework for the Medicare-certified home health agency of the future. The authors also identify challenges and recommendations for achievement of this framework.