PurposeQuality of life (QOL) is an important concept in the field of health and medicine. QOL is a complex concept that is interpreted and defined differently within and between disciplines, including the fields of health and medicine. The aims of this study were to systematically review the literature on QOL in medicine and health research and to describe the country of origin, target groups, instruments, design, and conceptual issues.MethodsA systematic review was conducted to identify research studies on QOL and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The databases Scopus, which includes Embase and MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched for articles published during one random week in November 2016. The ten predefined criteria of Gill and Feinstein were used to evaluate the conceptual and methodological rigor.ResultsQOL research is international and involves a variety of target groups, research designs, and QOL measures. According to the criteria of Gill and Feinstein, the results show that only 13% provided a definition of QOL, 6% distinguished QOL from HRQOL. The most frequently fulfilled criteria were: (i) stating the domains of QOL to be measured; (ii) giving a reason for choosing the instruments used; and (iii) aggregating the results from multiple items.ConclusionQOL is an important endpoint in medical and health research, and QOL research involves a variety of patient groups and different research designs. Based on the current evaluation of the methodological and conceptual clarity of QOL research, we conclude that the majority QOL studies in health and medicine have conceptual and methodological challenges.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background The main goal of pediatric palliative care (PPC) is to improve or maintain the best possible quality of life (QoL) for the child and their family. PPC can be provided in community health centres, within the specialist health care service and/or in the child’s home. Home is often the preferred place for families, and recommendations state that, whenever possible, the family home should be the centre of care for the child. The aim of this study is to systematically review the experiences and needs of families with children receiving palliative care at home. Methods We conducted a systematic review and searched the peer-reviewed databases CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo and MEDLINE for articles published between January 2000 and October 2019. We included 23 studies emphasising the experience of family members when their child (0–18 years) received palliative care at home. We used a thematic analysis to identify relevant themes in the literature, and synthesised the findings from the different studies. Results The review represents the experiences of the families of almost 300 children with life-limiting (LL) and life-threatening (LT) conditions receiving palliative care at home. In general, the children’s mothers are interviewed, and seldom the sick children themselves or their siblings. Most families preferred staying at home since it made it easier to maintain a normal family life, was less stressful for the sick child, and meant that siblings could still attend school and be with friends. Families experienced a range of challenges due to the coordination of care, including a lack of support and adequately skilled staff with appropriate experience. Respite care was needed in order to cope with everyday life. Some studies were not specific concerning the place of care, and some relevant papers may have been omitted. Conclusions Families receiving PPC need organised, individualised support from a skilled PPC team. Respite care is necessary in order to manage a demanding home-care situation and parents need support for siblings. Privacy to be a family is a need, and many families need financial support. Future studies should focus on PPC at home in the perspectives of sick children and their siblings.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant disruptions in the implementation of programs across educational institutions. Nursing students, being both young adults and by practical training, part of the health care system, may be particularly vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to explore the associations between self-reported fear of COVID-19, general health, psychological distress and overall quality of life (QoL) in a sample of Norwegian baccalaureate nursing students compared to reference data. Methods The survey targeted baccalaureate nursing students from five universities in February 2021. An electronic questionnaire consisted of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 5 (SCL-5), one general health and one overall QoL question. The respondents’ mean scores were compared to reference data. Hierarchical regression analyses were conducted, and effect sizes (Cohen’s d) were evaluated. Results In total, 2605 out of 6088 (43%) students responded. Their FCV-19S scores (mean 2.45, CI 2.42, 2.48) were significantly higher than those of the reference population (mean 1.8, P < 0.001). Nursing students scores showed significantly lower general health (mean 3.50 ± 0.93 SD, population mean = 3.57, Cohen’s d = 0.07), higher levels of psychological distress (mean 2.68 ± 1.03 SD, population mean = 2.12, Cohen’s d = 0.55) and lower overall QoL (mean 5.50 ± 2.16 SD, population mean = 8.00, Cohen’s d = 1.16) compared to pre-pandemic reference data. FCV-19S scores were significantly associated with levels of general health (Cohen’s d = 0.26), psychological distress (Cohen’s d = 0.76) and overall QoL (Cohen’s d = 0.18). Conclusions Baccalaureate nursing students reported worse outcomes during the Covid-19 pandemic on general health, psychological distress and overall QoL compared to the reference population. Level of fear of Covid-19, however, accounted for few of these differences. Other factors related to the pandemic may have reduced nursing students’ overall QoL.

Aims and objectives To use nursing students to observe hand hygiene adherence in nursing homes and to explore whether the students' reflections after observing hand hygiene practices gives them a deeper understanding of the subject matter. Background Residents in nursing homes worldwide have low tolerance for healthcare‐associated infections that require antibiotics, and hand hygiene is the single most effective action to reduce infections. Design Observational study using (a) World Health Organization's (WHO) “Five moments for hand hygiene” validated tool to record indications and adherence and (b) an exploratory study of individual reflection notes from students conducted during and after observations. Methods From February 12–15, 2018, 26 nursing students in their second semester of a 3‐year bachelor programme participated as observers in five wards in four nursing homes in the Oslo metropolitan area. This study was performed according to the STROBE statement. Results Hand hygiene was performed for 57.2% of the 2,393 indications observed and recorded. Adherence differed significantly by type of personnel and by location. Four thematic categories emerged from the reflection notes: (a) practical awareness and introspection; (b) visualisation and enhancement of understanding of practice learning; (c) incorrect hand hygiene practices; and (d) stimulation to increase essential knowledge. Conclusion Hand hygiene adherence was too low to prevent healthcare‐associated infections and to reduce the use of antibiotics. The students' reflection notes indicated more “insight and understanding of the complexity of hand hygiene.” We suggest using nursing students in clinical placement as a means of incorporating different interventions as part of their learning skills and become “living reminders” of the importance of hygiene and infection prevention. Relevance for clinical practice Improving the student's activity about hygiene and infection prevention in clinical placement may help to raise awareness by healthcare workers in nursing homes.

PurposeThe purposes of this study were to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of long-term social assistance recipients (LTRs) with and without chronic pain and determine the effect of select demographic, social, pain, alcohol, and illicit drug use characteristics on the physical and mental components of their HRQOL.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, which is part of a larger study that evaluated the health and functional abilities of LTRs in Norway, 405 LTRs of which 178 had chronic pain were recruited from 14 of 433 municipalities.ResultsLTRs with chronic pain were older (P < .001), more often married (P = .002), feeling more lonely, (P = .048), and had more problems with alcohol (P = .035). The final regression model explained 41.2% (P < .001) of the variance in PCS scores and 32.2% (P < .001) of the variance in MCS scores. Being in chronic pain (29.7%), being older (4.7%), and never married (2%) predicted worse PCS scores. Feeling lonely (11.9%), having problems with illicit drug use (5.9%), and being in chronic pain (2.9%) predicted worse MCS scores.ConclusionLTRs with chronic pain rated both the physical and mental components of HRQOL lower than LTRs without chronic pain. The MCS score in both groups was negatively effected.