AimThe aim of this study was to critically analyse and describe gender differences related to self-care among patients with chronic heart failure (HF).Methods and resultsA monocentric real-world cohort of 346 patients with chronic HF in follow-up was used for this cross-sectional study. We report data related to the cohort’s demographic and clinical characteristics. Self-care was assessed using the Self-Care of Heart Failure Index before patients’ discharge. After bivariate analysis, logistical regression models were used to describe the relationship between gender, self-care behaviours and self-care confidence. While men were found to have more than quadruple the risk of poor self-care than women (OR 4.596; 95% CI 1.075 to 19.650), men were also found to be approximately 60% more likely to have adequate self-care confidence than women (OR 0.412; 95% CI 0.104 to 0.962). Considering that self-care confidence is described as a positive predictor of behaviours, our results suggest a paradox. It is possible that the patient–caregiver relationship mediates the effect of confidence on behaviours. Overall, adequate levels of self-care behaviours are a current issue, ranging 7.6%–18.0%.ConclusionThis study sets the stage for future research where elements of the patient–caregiver relationship ought to be considered to inform the planning of appropriate educational interventions. We recommend routinely measuring patients’ self-care behaviours to guide their follow-up and as a basis for any changes in their daily life behaviours.

Introduction. The increase in chronic degenerative diseases poses many challenges to the efficacy and sustainability of healthcare systems, establishing the family and community nurse (FCN) who delivers primary care as a strategic role. FCNs, indeed, can embrace the complexity of the current healthcare demand, sustain the ageing of the population, and focus on illness prevention and health promotion, ensuring a continuous and coordinated integration between hospitals and primary care ser. The literature on FCNs is rich but diverse. This study aimed to critically summarise the literature about the FCN, providing an overall view of the recent evidence. Methods. A state-of-art systematic review was performed on PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus, employing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and checklist to guide the search and reporting. Results. Five interpretative themes emerged from the 90 included articles: clinical practice, core competencies, outcomes, Organisational and educational models, and advanced training program. Conclusions. FCNs can make a major contribution to a population’s health, playing a key role in understanding and responding to patients’ needs. Even if the investment in prevention does not guarantee immediate required strategies and foresight on the part of decisionmakers, it is imperative to invest more political, institutional, and economic resources to support and ensure the FCNs’ competencies and their professional autonomy.

Background: Pressure ulcers (PUs) represent a current issue for healthcare delivery.Nurse self-efficacy in managing PUs could predict patients' outcome, being a proxy assessment of their overall competency to managing PUs. However, a valid and reliable scale of this task-specific self-efficacy has not yet been developed.Objectives: To develop a valid and reliable scale to assess nurses' self-efficacy in managing PUs, that is, the pressure ulcer management self-efficacy scale for nurses (PUM-SES). Methods:This study had a multi-method and multi-phase design, where study reporting was supported by the STROBE checklist (File S1). Phase 1 referred to the scale development, consisting in the items' generation, mainly based on themes emerged from the literature and discussed within a panel of experts. Phase 2 focused on a three-step validation process: the first step aimed to assess face and content validity of the pool of items previously generated (initial version of the PUM-SES); the second aimed to assess psychometrics properties through exploratory factorial analysis; the third step assessed construct validity through confirmative factorial analysis, while concurrent validity was evaluated describing the relationships between PUM-SES and an established general self-efficacy measurement. Reliability was assessed through the evaluation of stability and internal consistency.Results: PUM-SES showed evidence of face and content validity, adequate construct and concurrent validity, internal consistency and stability. Specifically, PUM-SES had four domains, labelled as follows: assessment, planning, supervision and decisionmaking. These domains were predicted by the same second-order factor, labelled as PU management self-efficacy.Conclusion: PUM-SES is a 10-item scale to measure nurses' self-efficacy in PU management. A standardised 0-100 scoring is suggested for computing each domain and the overall scale. PUM-SES might be used in clinical and educational research.

No abstract