Intensive care unit (ICU) environment has a very strong and unavoidable negative impact on patients' sleep. Sleep deprivation in ICU patients has been already studied and negative effects on their outcome (prolonged ICU stay, decreased recovery) and complication rates (incidence of delirium, neuropsychological sequels of critical illness) discussed. Several interventions potentially improving the sleep disturbance in ICU (sleep-promotion strategies) have been assumed and tested for clinical practice. We present a review of recent literature focused on chosen types of non-pharmacological interventions (earplugs and eye mask) analysing their effect on sleep quality/quantity. From the total amount of 82 papers found in biomedical databases (CINAHL, PubMed and SCOPUS) we included the 19 most eligible studies meeting defined inclusion/exclusion criteria involving 1 379 participants. Both experimental and clinical trials, either ICU and non-ICU patient populations were analysed in the review. Most of the reviewed studies showed a significant improvement of subjective sleep quality when using described non-pharmacological interventions (objective parameters were not significantly validated). Measuring the sleep quality is a major concern limiting the objective comparison of the studies' results since non-standardised (and mainly individual) tools for sleep quality assessment were used. Despite the heterogeneity of analysed studies and some common methodological issues (sample size, design, outcome parameters choice and comparison) earplugs and eye mask showed potential positive effects on sleep quality and the incidence of delirium in ICU patients.

ObjectivesSafe pharmaceutical care (PC) requires an interprofessional team approach, involving physicians, nurses and pharmacists. Nurses’ roles however, are not always explicit and clear, complicating interprofessional collaboration. The aim of this study is to describe nurses’ practice and interprofessional collaboration in PC, from the viewpoint of nurses, physicians and pharmacists.DesignA cross-sectional survey.SettingThe study was conducted in 17 European countries, each with their own health systems.ParticipantsPharmacists, physicians and nurses with an active role in PC were surveyed.Main outcome measuresNurses’ involvement in PC, experiences of interprofessional collaboration and communication and views on nurses’ competences.ResultsA total of 4888 nurses, 974 physicians and 857 pharmacists from 17 European countries responded. Providing patient education and information (PEI), monitoring medicines adherence (MMA), monitoring adverse/therapeutic effects (ME) and prescribing medicines were considered integral to nursing practice by 78%, 73%, 69% and 15% of nurses, respectively. Most respondents were convinced that quality of PC would be improved by increasing nurses’ involvement in ME (95%), MMA (95%), PEI (91%) and prescribing (53%). Mean scores for the reported quality of collaboration between nurses and physicians, collaboration between nurses and pharmacists and interprofessional communication were respectively <7/10, ≤4/10, <6/10 for all four aspects of PC.ConclusionsME, MMA, PEI and prescribing are part of nurses’ activities, and most healthcare professionals felt their involvement should be extended. Collaboration between nurses and physicians on PC is limited and between nurses and pharmacists even more.

Objectives To understand healthcare professionals’ experiences and perceptions of nurses’ potential or ideal roles in pharmaceutical care (PC). Design Qualitative study conducted through semi-structured in-depth interviews. Setting Between December 2018 and October 2019, interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals of 14 European countries in four healthcare settings: hospitals, community care, mental health and long-term residential care. Participants In each country, pharmacists, physicians and nurses in each of the four settings were interviewed. Participants were selected on the basis that they were key informants with broad knowledge and experience of PC. Data collection and analysis All interviews were conducted face to face. Each country conducted an initial thematic analysis. Consensus was reached through a face-to-face discussion of all 14 national leads. Results 340 interviews were completed. Several tasks were described within four potential nursing responsibilities, that came up as the analysis themes, being: 1) monitoring therapeutic/adverse effects of medicines, 2) monitoring medicines adherence, 3) decision making on medicines, including prescribing 4) providing patient education/information. Nurses’ autonomy varied across Europe, from none to limited to a few tasks and emergencies to a broad range of tasks and responsibilities. Intended level of autonomy depended on medicine types and level of education. Some changes are needed before nursing roles can be optimised and implemented in practice. Lack of time, shortage of nurses, absence of legal frameworks and limited education and knowledge are main threats to European nurses actualising their ideal role in PC. Conclusions European nurses have an active role in PC. Respondents reported positive impacts on care quality and patient outcomes when nurses assumed PC responsibilities. Healthcare professionals expect nurses to report observations and assessments. This key patient information should be shared and addressed by the interprofessional team. The study evidences the need of a unique and consensus-based PC framework across Europe.

No abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the perception of selected stressors acting on the Czech intensive care unit (ICU) of Czech patients, their families and attending nurses. Design: A descriptive comparative study. Methods: Stressor perception was measured by a Czech version of the standardised questionnaire, The Environmental Stressor Questionnaire (ESQ). The sample group consisted of 90 people. Data were obtained via pairing (patientrelativenurse). The family and the attending nurses evaluated stressors by empathising with the patient. Results: When evaluating the data obtained, it was ascertained that the relatives and attending nurses perceive stressors acting on the ICU as worse than patients themselves do. The overall level of stressor perception in the relatives was statistically significantly higher than in the patients (z = -3.72; p < 0.001). A statistically significant difference was also confirmed with regard to perception of stressors between attending nurses and patients (z = -2.23; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Both the relatives and attending nurses perceive stressors in the intensive care unit as worse than the patients themselves do. The negative impacts of stressors can be reduced by implementing new approaches in nursing care.