Krista S Chavez1, Andrew A Dwyer2, Anne-Sylvie Ramelet3. 1. University of Lausanne and the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), Institute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare - IUFRS, Biopole 2, Route de la Corniche 10, 1010 Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: chavezkrista14@gmail.com. 2. University of Lausanne and the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), Institute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare - IUFRS, Biopole 2, Route de la Corniche 10, 1010 Lausanne, Switzerland. 3. University of Lausanne and the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), Institute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare - IUFRS, Biopole 2, Route de la Corniche 10, 1010 Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: anne-sylvie.ramelet@unil.ch.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify and summarize the common clinical settings, interventions, and outcomes of nurse practitioner care specific to older people. DESIGN: Scoping review of the international published and grey literature. DATA SOURCES: A structured literature search was conducted of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Collaboration and Joanna Briggs Institute databases. REVIEW METHODS: Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework, randomized controlled and quasi-experimental studies of Masters-prepared nurse practitioners providing care for patients over 65 years were included. Studies were reviewed independently by two investigators. Data were extracted, collated by setting, summarized in tables and synthesized for analysis. RESULTS: In total, 56 primary research studies from four countries and 23 systematic reviews were identified. Primary studies were conducted in primary care (n=13), home care (n=14), long-term care (n=10), acute/hospital care (n=9), and transitional care (n=10). Nurse practitioner interventions included substitutive as well as a supplementation NP role elements to meet specific unmet patient care needs. Studies examined six main outcome measures: service utilization (n=41), cost (n=24), length of stay (n=14), health indices (n=44), satisfaction (n=14) and quality of life (n=7). Cumulatively, nurse practitioners demonstrated enhanced results in 83/144 (58%) of outcomes compared to physician-only or usual care. The most commonly measured financial-related outcome was service utilization (n=41) and benefits were frequently reported in home care (8/9, 89%) and long-term care (7/10, 70%) settings. Among patient and care-related outcomes health indices were most frequently measured (n=44). Primary care most frequently reported improved health indices (11/13, 85%). Transitional care reported improved outcomes across all measures, except for service utilization. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates improved or non-inferiority results of nurse practitioner care in older people across settings. More well-designed, rigorous studies are needed particularly in relation to costs. The results of this review could be used for future systemic review of effectiveness of NP care specific to older people. Despite the demonstrated NP role value, barriers to implementing the nurse practitioner role persist internationally and more work is needed to develop and promote these roles.
OBJECTIVES: To identify and summarize the common clinical settings, interventions, and outcomes of nurse practitioner care specific to older people. DESIGN: Scoping review of the international published and grey literature. DATA SOURCES: A structured literature search was conducted of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Collaboration and Joanna Briggs Institute databases. REVIEW METHODS: Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework, randomized controlled and quasi-experimental studies of Masters-prepared nurse practitioners providing care for patients over 65 years were included. Studies were reviewed independently by two investigators. Data were extracted, collated by setting, summarized in tables and synthesized for analysis. RESULTS: In total, 56 primary research studies from four countries and 23 systematic reviews were identified. Primary studies were conducted in primary care (n=13), home care (n=14), long-term care (n=10), acute/hospital care (n=9), and transitional care (n=10). Nurse practitioner interventions included substitutive as well as a supplementation NP role elements to meet specific unmet patient care needs. Studies examined six main outcome measures: service utilization (n=41), cost (n=24), length of stay (n=14), health indices (n=44), satisfaction (n=14) and quality of life (n=7). Cumulatively, nurse practitioners demonstrated enhanced results in 83/144 (58%) of outcomes compared to physician-only or usual care. The most commonly measured financial-related outcome was service utilization (n=41) and benefits were frequently reported in home care (8/9, 89%) and long-term care (7/10, 70%) settings. Among patient and care-related outcomes health indices were most frequently measured (n=44). Primary care most frequently reported improved health indices (11/13, 85%). Transitional care reported improved outcomes across all measures, except for service utilization. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates improved or non-inferiority results of nurse practitioner care in older people across settings. More well-designed, rigorous studies are needed particularly in relation to costs. The results of this review could be used for future systemic review of effectiveness of NP care specific to older people. Despite the demonstrated NP role value, barriers to implementing the nurse practitioner role persist internationally and more work is needed to develop and promote these roles.
Keywords:
Advanced practice nursing; Continuity of patient care; Diffusion of innovation; Geriatric nursing; Home care services; Long term care; Nurse practitioner; Primary care; Transitional care
Authors: Juh Hyun Shin; Rosemary Anne Renaut; Mark Reiser; Ji Yeon Lee; Ty Yi Tang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-06 Impact factor: 3.390