Reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic HSCT (RIC) has less regimen-related morbidity and mortality than myeloablative allogeneic HSCT (MT) offering allogeneic transplantation to patients otherwise excluded. Whether these advantages improve health-related quality of life (HRQL) is unknown. We examined the HRQL effects of RIC and MT in patients with hematological diseases pre-transplant (baseline), days 0, 30 100, 1 and 2 years following HSCT. HRQL was measured using the Short Form-36 Health Survey and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -General and BMT. Data were analyzed using mixed linear modeling adjusting for baseline HRQL differences. Patients (RIC ¼ 41, MT ¼ 35) were predominately male (67%), in remission/stable disease (65%) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status p1 (97%). HRQL progressively improved (Po0.01) in both groups with higher scores at day 100 compared to days 0 and 30; there was no difference between groups during early recovery. At 2 years, all survivors (n ¼ 43) reported HRQL similar or better than baseline. Results suggest RIC and MT patients experience a similar pattern of HRQL improvement during early recovery. Two-year survivors report a return to baseline or better in HRQL by day 100, with the exception of physical health in MT patients.

Purpose Translating clinically valid genomic discoveries into practice is hinged not only on technologic advances, but also on nurses—the largest global contingent of health providers—acquiring requisite competencies to apply these discoveries in clinical care. The study aim was to assess practicing nurse attitudes, practices, receptivity, confidence, and competency of integrating genomics into nursing practice. Design A convenience sample of practicing nurses was recruited to complete an online survey that assessed domains from Roger’s Diffusion of Innovations Theory and used family history utilization as the basis for competency assessment. Methods Results were tabulated and analyzed using descriptive statistical techniques. Findings Two-hundred-thirty-nine licensed registered nurses, 22 to 72 years of age, with a median of 20 years in practice, responded, for an overall response rate of 28%. Most were White (83%), female (92%), and held baccalaureate degrees (56%). Seventy-one percent considered genetics to be very important to nursing practice; however, 81% rated their understanding of the genetics of common diseases as poor or fair. Per-question response rates varied widely. Instrument assessment indicated that modifications were necessary to decrease respondent burden. Conclusions Respondents’ perceived genomic competency was inadequate, family history was not routinely utilized in care delivery, and the extent of family history varied widely. However, most nurses indicated interest in pursuing continuing genomic education. Clinical Relevance Findings from this study can lead to the development of targeted education that will facilitate optimal workforce preparation for the ongoing influx of genetics and genomics information, technologies, and targeted therapies into the healthcare arena. This pilot study provides a foundation on which to build the next step, which includes a national nursing workforce study.

Clinical research nursing is a specialty nursing practice focused on the care of research subjects and implementation of clinical research. A five-dimensional model (Clinical Practice [CP], Study Management, Care Coordination and Continuity, Contributing to the Science [CS], Human Subjects Protection) has been validated nationally to represent the domain of clinical research nursing practice. The purpose of this study was to describe the frequency and importance of activities within each dimension as performed by nurses in clinical research and to describe differences between roles. One thousand and four nurses from the NIH Intramural Campus in Bethesda, Maryland, were invited to participate in an anonymous web-based survey. Participants (N = 412) were predominantly female (90%) with ≥11 years research experience (70%). Two hundred eighty-eight respondents (70%) identified themselves as clinical research nurses (CRNs) and 74 (18%) as research nurse coordinators (RNCs). CP activities were reported most frequent and important whereas CS activities were least frequent and important. CRN and RNC activity frequency differed across all dimensions (p < 0.001) with CRNs reporting significantly higher levels of CP activities and significantly lower levels in other dimensions. Delineating specialty activities and practice across roles enhances the understanding of nurses’ role in clinical research and provides groundwork for role-based training.

Purpose/Objectives To develop and validate a taxonomy for the domain of clinical research nursing. Design Survey. Setting Clinical research settings in the United States. Sample A purposefully selected expert panel of 22 nurses who were actively practicing or supervising in a clinical research environment. Methods A study team consisting of nurses with experience in clinical research synthesized peer-reviewed articles, academic curricula, professional guidelines, position descriptions, and expert opinion. Using the Delphi technique, three rounds of surveys were conducted to validate the taxonomy. The three sequential questionnaires were completed over five months. Main Research Variables Activities performed by nurses in a clinical research setting. Findings A taxonomy for clinical research nursing was validated with five dimensions and 52 activities: Clinical Practice (4 activities), Study Management (23 activities), Care Coordination and Continuity (10 activities), Human Subjects Protection (6 activities), and Contributing to the Science (9 activities). Conclusions This study validated activities for direct care providers and nurses with the primary focus of research coordination. The findings identify a variety of activities that are unique to nurses in a clinical research setting. Implications for Nursing Nurses play an integral role in the clinical research enterprise. Validating a taxonomy for the specialty of clinical research nursing allows for roles to be compared across settings, competency requirements to be defined, and nursing organizations to be guided in the development of specialty certification.