The discussion of advanced practice in nursing is ongoing, yet the need for practice to advance and develop across the health economy is called for in much of the current literature and government policy. This article considers an educational intervention that set out to advance primary care nursing. The programme aimed to facilitated nurses to understand clients, families and carers in the community setting, to offer a high standard of care, to support specialist practitioner team leaders to work across community nursing disciplines and to make their own career development choices. Advancing practice in this novel primary care nursing programme required change management, collaboration, partnership, leadership and involvement of the staff nurses themselves.
ObjectiveHealth-related research in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has grown over the years. However, concerns have been raised about the state of research ethics committees (RECs). This scoping review examines the literature on RECs for health-related research in SSA and identifies strategies that have been applied to strengthen the RECs. It focuses on three aspects of RECs: regulatory governance and leadership, administrative and financial capacity and technical capacity of members.DesignA scoping review of published literature, including grey literature, was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute approach.Data sourcesBioOne, CINAHL, Embase (via Ovid), Education Abstracts, Global Health, Google Scholar, Jstor, OpenEdition (French), Philosopher’s Index, PsycINFO, PubMed, Science Citation and Expanded Index (Web of Science), reference lists of included studies and specific grey literature sources.Eligibility criteriaWe included empirical studies on RECs for health-related research in SSA, covering topics on REC leadership and governance, administrative and financial capacity and the technical capacity of REC members. We included studies published between 01 January 2000 and 18 February 2022 and written in English, French, Portuguese or Swahili.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers screened the records. Data were extracted by one reviewer and cross-checked by another. Owing to the heterogeneity of included studies, thematic analysis was used.ResultsWe included 54 studies. The findings show that most RECs in SSA work under significant administrative and financial constraints, with few opportunities for capacity building for committee members. This has an impact on the quality of reviews and the overall performance of RECs. Although most countries have national governance systems for RECs, they lack regulations on accountability, transparency and monitoring of RECs.ConclusionsThis review provides a comprehensive overview of the literature on RECs for health-related research in SSA and contributes to our understanding of how RECs can be strengthened.
The implementation of clinical governance (Department of Health, 1997) requires the review of practice by consideration of complaints and clinical incidents. A systematic review of the clinical incident forms in group homes for those with learning disabilities, within an NHS community trust, highlighted issues for concern. This led to an audit being conducted of drug administration procedures involving examination of records and observation of practice. It demonstrated that there was general adherence to the trust's policies. The audit stimulated debate, and a number of potential areas for action were identified. The review of drug administration with clients who have learning difficulties raised wider questions about the scarcity of evidence in this area to support practice, the culture of client-centred homes and whether monitoring systems are sufficiently robust.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.