Cancer survivors are at an increased risk of experiencing physical and psychological ill-effects following cancer treatment. Rural cancer survivors are at a greater risk of future health problems following a cancer diagnosis compared to their urban counterparts. Physical activity has been targeted as a health promotion priority in cancer survivors. Research indicates that a large portion of cancer survivors do not meet physical activity recommendations. The purpose of this quasi-randomized controlled trial was to test the effectiveness of an online 12-week walking intervention designed for cancer survivors, and to explore its impact on physical health indicators and quality of life outcomes. Steps Toward Improving Diet and Exercise among cancer survivors (STRIDE) is an online resource designed according to Social Cognitive Theory and Self Determination Theory, based on individualized step goal setting. Measures of physiology, physical fitness, and quality of life were taken at the baseline, post-intervention, and three-month follow-up in an Intervention group (n = 46) and active Control group (n = 45). The Control group was provided with a pedometer but did not have access to the online program. Three-factor repeated measures ANOVAs indicated that there were improvements in physical fitness (p < 0.01), systolic blood pressure (p < 0.01), diastolic blood pressure (p < 0.01), waist girth (p < 0.01), mental health (p < 0.05), social functioning (p < 0.01), and general health (p < 0.01), but an increase in bodily pain (p < 0.01), from the baseline to week 12 and the three-month follow-up, irrespective of group allocation. Pedometer interventions, delivered with or without online support and step goal setting, show promise for improving the overall health of cancer survivors, at least in the short term.

International evidence suggests nursing is not providing fundamental care consistently or adequately, resulting in poor outcomes for patients and healthcare systems. One possible reason for this inadequate care delivery is nursing education, with fundamental care often implicit or invisible in nursing curricula. To understand how best to teach fundamental care to pre-registration (pre-licensure) students, we developed and piloted a six-week intervention that incorporated into the first-year curriculum a more explicit focus on fundamental care. A conceptual fundamental care framework was used to guide students' learning, and clinical skills sessions were structured to reinforce the framework's conceptual understanding and enable students to practice delivering fundamental care in an integrated manner. The intervention's impact was explored via a pre-post survey and focus groups. The survey demonstrated that the intervention did not affect students' ability to identify patients' fundamental care needs; however, focus groups showed the intervention assisted students in understanding the complexity of fundamental care and its importance to patients' experiences. The pilot provides preliminary evidence on the importance of embedding fundamental care into nursing curricula early and explicitly, and emphasising the integrated nature of such care, particularly through structured debriefs, consistent terminology, and opportunities for students to experience care as a patient.

This online pedometer-based walking intervention is feasible and effectively increases motivation for walking and enhances health-related quality of life in South Australian rural cancer survivors. A randomized controlled trial of this intervention is warranted.

Fundamental care has come under increased scrutiny due to high-profile reports globally of poor nursing care. The reasons for these documented care failures are widely debated, with some scholars identifying issues with how fundamental care is valued within healthcare systems and by nurses. During focus groups designed to evaluate a fundamental care education intervention, we identified a perception commonly held by first-year preregistration (pre-licensure) students that appeared indicative of a devaluing of fundamental care: students routinely described fundamental care as 'common sense' and doubted that such care should form a key part of their education. In this paper, we explore this perception and its potential consequences for nursing education, clinical practice, and research. We argue that a perception of fundamental care as 'common sense' is a myth; it undermines the inherent complexity of providing such care to a consistently high standard and has negative implications for nursing education and continuing professional development, patient experiences and outcomes, and the advancement of nursing science. It is therefore a perception that must be challenged.

GPs view patient-focused health apps positively, particularly to support them in providing patient care. Discussing information recorded in apps during consultations and frequent promotion of apps are feasible ways to integrate apps into their current work practices. Further studies involving evaluations of apps in improving health care delivery and patient communication in general practice are required.