Identifying indicators sensitive to primary healthcare nurse practitioner practice: a review of systematic reviews protocol.

Primary healthcare nurse practitioners (PHCNPs) practice in a wide range of clinical settings and with diverse patient populations. Several systematic reviews have examined outcomes of PHCNP roles. However, there is a lack of consistency in the definitions used for the PHCNP role across the reviews. The identification of indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice from the perspective of patients, providers and the healthcare system will allow researchers, clinicians and decision-makers to understand how these providers contribute to outcomes of care. A review of systematic reviews is proposed to describe the current state of knowledge about indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice using recognised role definitions. Outcomes of interest include any outcome indicator measuring the effectiveness of PHCNPs. We will limit our search to 2010 onwards to capture the most up-to-date trends. The following electronic databases will be searched: Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews and Controlled Trials Register, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, EMBASE, Global Health, Health Economics Evaluation Database, Health Evidence, HealthStar, Health Systems Evidence, Joanna Briggs Institute, Medline, PDQ-Evidence, PubMed and Web of Science. The search strategies will be reviewed by an academic librarian. Reference lists of all relevant publications will be reviewed. Grey literature will be searched from 2010 onwards, and will include: CADTH Information Services, CADTH's Grey Matters tool, OpenGrey, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses and WHO. The PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews will be searched to identify registered review protocols. The review protocol was developed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols recommendations. A narrative synthesis will be used to summarise study findings. No ethical approval is required for the study. The data used in the study will be abstracted from published systematic reviews. Dissemination strategies will include peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations and presentations to key stakeholders. CRD42020198182.

Kilpatrick K ，Tchouaket EN ，Chouinard MC ，Savard I ，Bouabdillah N ，Houle J ，St-Louis G ，Jabbour M ，Atallah R ... -  《BMJ Open》

Identifying indicators sensitive to primary healthcare nurse practitioner practice: A review of systematic reviews.

To identify indicators sensitive to the practice of primary healthcare nurse practitioners (PHCNPs). A review of systematic reviews was undertaken to identify indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice. Published and grey literature was searched from January 1, 2010 to December 2, 2022. Titles/abstracts (n = 4251) and full texts (n = 365) were screened independently by two reviewers, with a third acting as a tie-breaker. Reference lists of relevant publications were reviewed. Risk of bias was examined independently by two reviewers using AMSTAR-2. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer to describe study characteristics, indicators, and results. Indicators were recoded into categories. Findings were summarized using narrative synthesis. Forty-four systematic reviews were retained including 271 indicators that were recoded into 26 indicator categories at the patient, provider and health system levels. Nineteen reviews were assessed to be at low risk of bias. Patient indicator categories included activities of daily living, adaptation to health conditions, clinical conditions, diagnosis, education-patient, mortality, patient adherence, quality of life, satisfaction, and signs and symptoms. Provider indicator categories included adherence to best practice-providers, education-providers, illness prevention, interprofessional team functioning, and prescribing. Health system indicator categories included access to care, consultations, costs, emergency room visits, healthcare service delivery, hospitalizations, length of stay, patient safety, quality of care, scope of practice, and wait times. Equal to improved care for almost all indicators was found consistently for the PHCNP group. Very few indicators favoured the control group. No indicator was identified for high/low fidelity simulation, cultural safety and cultural sensitivity with people in vulnerable situations or Indigenous Peoples. This review of systematic reviews identified patient, provider and health system indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice. The findings help clarify how PHCNPs contribute to care outcomes. CRD42020198182.

Kilpatrick K ，Tchouaket E ，Savard I ，Chouinard MC ，Bouabdillah N ，Provost-Bazinet B ，Costanzo G ，Houle J ，St-Louis G ，Jabbour M ，Atallah R ... -  《PLoS One》

A global perspective of advanced practice nursing research: A review of systematic reviews protocol.

In 2020, the World Health Organization called for the expansion and greater recognition of all nursing roles, including advanced practice nurses (APNs), to better meet patient care needs. As defined by the International Council of Nurses (ICN), the two most common APN roles include nurse practitioners (NPs) and clinical nurse specialists (CNSs). They help ensure care to communities as well as patients and families with acute, chronic or complex conditions. Moreover, APNs support providers to deliver high quality care and improve access to services. Currently, there is much variability in the use of advanced practice nursing roles globally. A clearer understanding of the roles that are in place across the globe, and how they are being used will support greater role harmonization, and inform global priorities for advanced practice nursing education, research, and policy reform. To identify current gaps in advanced practice nursing research globally. This review of systematic reviews will provide a description of the current state of the research, including gaps, on advanced practice nursing globally. We will include reviews that examine APNs, NPs or CNSs using recognized role definitions. We will search the CINAHL, EMBASE, Global Health, HealthStar, PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews and Controlled Trials Register, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Joanna Briggs Institute, and Web of Science electronic databases for reviews published from January 2011 onwards, with no restrictions on jurisdiction or language. We will search the grey literature and hand search the reference lists of all relevant reviews to identify additional studies. We will extract country, patient, provider, health system, educational, and policy/scope of practice data. We will assess the quality of each included review using the CASP criteria, and summarize their findings. This review of systematic reviews protocol was developed following the PRISMA-P recommendations. CRD42021278532.

Kilpatrick K ，Savard I ，Audet LA ，Kra-Friedman A ，Atallah R ，Jabbour M ，Zhou W ，Wheeler K ，Ladd E ，Gray DC ，Henderson C ，Spies LA ，McGrath H ，Rogers M ... -  《PLoS One》

Student and educator experiences of maternal-child simulation-based learning: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.

MacKinnon K ，Marcellus L ，Rivers J ，Gordon C ，Ryan M ，Butcher D ... -  《-》

Economic evaluation of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) for improving health outcomes in adult population: a systematic review protocol.

Insomnia is associated with a number of adverse consequences that place a substantial economic burden on individuals and society. Cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is a promising intervention that can improve outcomes in people who suffer from insomnia. However, evidence of its cost-effectiveness remains unclear. In this study, we will systematically review studies that report on economic evaluations of CBT-I and investigate the potential economic benefit of CBT-I as a treatment for insomnia. The search will include studies that use full economic evaluation methods (ie, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-benefit, cost-consequences and cost-minimisation analysis) and those that apply partial economic evaluation approaches (ie, cost description, cost-outcome description and cost analysis). We will conduct a preliminary search in MEDLINE, Google Scholar, MedNar and ProQuest dissertation and theses to build the searching terms. A full search strategy using all identified keywords and index terms will then be undertaken in several databases including MEDLINE, Psychinfo, Proquest, Cochrane, Scopus, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science and EMBASE. We will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for protocol guidelines in this review. Only articles in the English language and those reporting on adult populations will be included. We will use standardised data extraction tools for economic evaluations to retrieve and synthesise information from selected studies into themes and summarised in a Joanna Briggs Institute dominance ranking matrix. No formal ethics approval will be required as we will not be collecting primary data. Review findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, workshops, conference presentations and a media release. CRD42019133554.

Natsky AN ，Vakulin A ，Chai-Coetzer CL ，Lack L ，McEvoy RD ，Kaambwa B ... -  《BMJ Open》