Accessible Summary: What is Known on the subject?: Working on the frontline during the pandemic has had a negative impact on the mental health of health professionals. A significant proportion experienced anxiety, insomnia, posttraumatic stress or depression. What the paper adds to existing knowledge?: Analysis and synthesis of the evidence of the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the mental health of nurses based on their work context. There exists a gap in the literature as no studies were found that analysed the effects on nurses' mental health according to the level of care they worked in (hospital–primary care–nursing home). What are the implications for practice?: There is an urgent need to assess and respond to the impact of COVID‐19 on the physical and mental well‐being of nurses, and to monitor international policies for the improvement of nurses' working conditions. Introduction: Health professionals have suffered negative consequences during the COVID‐19 pandemic. No review has specifically addressed the impact of the pandemic on the mental health of nurses exclusively according to the work context.Aim: To analyse the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the mental health of nurses who have worked in hospitals, primary care centres and social health centres.Method: PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO and Cochrane databases were searched (Prospero number: CRD42021249513). Out of 706 papers, 31 studies (2020–2021) were included in the systematic review. A qualitative synthesis method was used to analyse the data.Results: Most studies were conducted in hospitals or frontline settings. The prevalence of moderate‐to‐severe symptoms was for anxiety 29.55%, depression 38.79%, posttraumatic stress disorder 29.8%, and insomnia 40.66%.Discussion: This review highlights the mental health effects among nurses working in acute hospital settings. It also evidences a data gap on mental health effects among nurses working in primary health care and in nursing homes.Implications for practice: In the post phase of the pandemic, there is an urgent need to assess and respond to the impact on the mental well‐being of nurses, and to monitor international policies for the improvement of nurses’ working conditions.

Aim: To explore the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the mental health of nurses working in primary, secondary, and tertiary healthcare centers in Navarre (Spain).Background: Healthcare workers, especially nurses, are at high risk for developing mental health problems during the COVID‐19 pandemic.Introduction: Spain ranks among the European countries with the highest incidence of and mortality from COVID‐19 and has a 31% deficit in the number of nurses compared with the average for the European Union.Methods: This was a cross‐sectional study involving 800 Registered Nurses in Navarre, Spain. Four standardized instruments, along with a self‐administered online questionnaire, were used to measure the impact in terms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and posttraumatic stress disorder. The STROBE checklist for cross‐sectional studies was used to report this study.Results: Of the 800 nurses, 68% had some level of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and distress, and of these, 38% had moderate or severe symptoms. Those who worked in hospital COVID units and in nursing homes showed a higher impact on their mental health.Discussion: The sustained pressure that nurses have experienced in their work during the COVID‐19 pandemic has negatively affected their mental health.Conclusion: This study found that nurses who worked in hospital COVID units and in nursing homes during the pandemic had worse mental health outcomes.Implications for nursing/policy: Recommendations for nursing policy include the need to implement coaching and emotional programs to support nurses on the frontlines of the pandemic. There is also an urgent need for the implementation of national training programs to strengthen health emergency preparedness, improve response capacity, and increase the resilience of nurses to disasters.

Invasive techniques such as venipuncture are painful procedures causing stress and anxiety, both in pediatric patients and in their carers. For this reason, efforts are being made to develop mitigating strategies for the patient’s pain and anxiety during the performance. To analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of the use of Virtual Reality distraction techniques as a measure of pain and anxiety reduction in pediatric patients and their parents. In addition, the effects of two modes of Virtual Reality (passive vs. interactive) were compared. A quasi-experimental study was carried out in the pediatric emergency department of a tertiary referral hospital in north Spain. The participants were children who underwent venipuncture for blood extraction and vascular cannulation. From the 124 patients, 51.6% (n = 64) were girls and 48.4% (n = 60) were boys (p = 0.574). The mean age was 8.4 years (SD: 4.1). The mean level of pain experienced was 2.33 (SD: 0.76) in the interactive VR group (n = 88) versus 2.67 (SD: 1.35) in patients with passive VR (n = 36) (p = 0.008); being the presence of anxiety in 27.3% (n = 24) of the cases treated with interactive Virtual Reality and in 88.9% (n = 32) of the patients with passive Virtual Reality (p = 0.000). The virtual reality is an effective method to reduce pain and anxiety levels in pediatric patients, with the effectiveness of interactive virtual reality and its use in the population aged 7–15 years being greater.

Many people with cancer have oral medication as part or all of their regime. This medication is primarily self administered in the community. This mini-review aimed to determine the level of compliance of adult cancer patients with oral chemotherapy and to assess the quality of the available evidence. Searches were undertaken using three electronic databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL) for studies which evaluated the compliance of adult cancer patients with oral antineoplastic agents through self-report, pill counts, drug/metabolite levels or microelectronic monitoring system (MEMS). Articles were selected if the follow-up was higher than 80% of patients. Six papers were identified for the review. The methodological quality of the studies was poor. The sample size of the majority of them was small and the method used to measure adherence was not entirely reliable. The results of these papers were varied and contradictory. A firm conclusion can not be drawn because the studies present significant methodological flaws. The comparison of results between studies is difficult due to the lack of a gold-standard measure of adherence and a standardised definition of non-compliance. Further research in this area is needed. However it does appear that compliance is a problem in this patient group.

Emotional care is an important part of the holistic labor and should be considered when providing care to people affected by perinatal losses. To synthesize the findings from recently published scientific evidence on the emotional care needed following perinatal loss, a search in PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science was carried out in January 2020 yielding 22 studies which met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed following Whittemore and Knafl’s (2005) methodology. One category on “offering emotional care” was identified: “Aspects influencing the psychosocial well-being of women after perinatal loss,” comprising eight themes: risk of complicated grief, cultural values, perinatal losses in multiple pregnancies, experience of subsequent pregnancies, need of information, contact with the deceased baby, impact on relatives, and strategies for emotional care. In conclusion, the evidence highlights the need of specific emotional grief care.