Unsafe commute driving behaviour among healthcare workers: a combined scoping review and concept analysis

IntroductionResearch indicates that leadership in the health professions can facilitate improvement of quality and efficiency of healthcare services. In the Philippines, leadership in the health professions plays a critical role in driving improvements in healthcare delivery and health professions education. Thus, the landscape of leadership in the health professions merits continuous exploration and deeper understanding. This scoping review aims to explore the landscape of leadership in the health professions in the Philippines. The scoping review will include published and unpublished research papers of any kind, such as primary research studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, letters, guidelines, websites, blogs and grey literature that report about leadership in the health professions in the Philippines. Exclusions are leadership studies on the health professions that discuss the professions outside the scope and context of the practice.Methods and analysisThe Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodological framework for scoping review will be used in this review. A three-step search strategy will be used consisting of an initial search, full search and screening of reference lists. The databases that will be included are Cinahl Ultimate, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, Emcare, Web of Science, JBI Evidence-based Practice Database, PubMed/Medline, ERIC, local journals and grey literature to determine pertinent sources about the topic. Sources searched will be screened by two independent reviewers and data will be extracted using a data extraction table. Disagreements will be resolved by a discussion through a third reviewer. The results of the search and the study inclusion process will be reported in full in the final scoping review and presented in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review flow diagram. Search strategy using the included databases started in August to September 2025, data extraction will start by October 2025, data analysis will start by November 2025 and the review is expected to be completed by December 2025.Ethics and disseminationThis study does not involve human participants and has been reviewed and classified for exempted review by the University of the Philippines Manila Research Ethics Board, which is a committee whose task is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. The findings of the scoping review will be disseminated through conference presentations and publication in a scientific journal.

Healthcare workers' knowledge, attitudes, practices, and influencing factors in the prevention of medical device-related pressure injuries: A scoping review.

An Introduction to Scoping Reviews.

This scoping review aims to systematically identify and map the roles of primary healthcare professionals in rural and remote areas during natural, man-made and pandemic disasters. Disasters can be caused by natural events, man-made incidents or infective agents resulting in a pandemic. Healthcare practitioners working in primary care settings have important roles during disaster prevention, preparedness, response and recovery. When rural and remote settings are affected by disasters, there are unique challenges for healthcare professionals. This review will aim to contribute to disaster management knowledge within rural and remote primary health care, and assist in the development of practice-based disaster preparedness and future policy discussion. This review will consider studies that include primary healthcare professionals, defined as having first-level contact with patients in the community, in rural or remote areas only. The role of the healthcare professional will also be discussed within the paper. Research from Australia, Canada, the USA, New Zealand and the UK will be included. Databases to be searched include CINAHL (EBSCOhost), PubMed, Scopus and Embase (Elsevier), as well as gray literature within Trove, MedNar and OpenGrey. The search will be limited to articles written in English and published from 1978 to the present. Titles and abstracts will be screened by two independent reviewers, and full-text studies will be retrieved and assessed against the inclusion criteria. Results will be recorded in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagram. Data will be extracted and presented as a tabular summary with supporting narratives and figures.

UNSTRUCTURED Background: Caregivers are instrumental in post-hospitalization care. Most of stroke survivors face complications, relying heavily on caregivers for rehabilitation and daily living support. However, inadequate preparation and resources burden these caregivers, predominantly women, impacting their quality of life. The strain leads to self-control fatigue, affecting their physiological-psychological-social well-being. Despite some understanding of the plight of family caregivers, the concept of self-control fatigue remains unclear and little is known about the causes, consequences, and effective intervention measures for self-control fatigue. Objective: This scoping review aims to demonstrate the definition of self-control fatigue and the experience of self-control fatigue in family caregivers of stroke survivors. Methods: The relevant studies will be examined following the methodological framework of the Joanna Briggs Institute for scoping studies. Sensitive searches for papers published from 1998 to August 2024 will be conducted in 8 electronic databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database (CNKI), Yiigle, and PubScholar. The concept analysis of self-control fatigue will strictly follow the principle-based concept analysis methodology. Two authors (CX and QW) will carry out the process of screening. The data extraction will include details related to the antecedents, consequences of self-control fatigue and the experience of self-control fatigue in family caregivers of stroke survivors. The results will be summarized and reported in table and text format to prioritize findings related to specific research issues. All relevant data and documents are available online in registered project on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ej36q) Discussion: This protocol provides a reliable and replicable method for subsequent scoping reviews with the primary purpose being concept analysis. The results of this scoping review may promote greater research utility for future studies related to self-control fatigue.

Plain English SummaryResearchers are expected to actively involve stakeholders (including patients, the public, health professionals, and others) in their research. Although researchers increasingly recognise that this is good practice, there is limited practical guidance about how to involve stakeholders. Systematic reviews are a research method in which international literature is brought together, using carefully designed and rigorous methods to answer a specified question about healthcare. We want to investigate how researchers have involved stakeholders in systematic reviews, and how involvement has potentially affected the quality and impact of reviews. We plan to bring this information together by searching and reviewing the literature for reports of stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews. This paper describes in detail the methods that we plan to use to do this.After carrying out comprehensive searches for literature, we will:1. Provide an overview of identified reports, describing key information such as types of stakeholders involved, and how.2. Pick out reports of involvement which include detailed descriptions of how researchers involved people in a systematic review and summarise the methods they used. We will consider who was involved, how people were recruited, and how the involvement was organised and managed.3. Bring together any reports which have explored the effect, or impact, of involving stakeholders in a systematic review. We will assess the quality of these reports, and summarise their findings.Once completed, our review will be used to produce training resources aimed at helping researchers to improve ways of involving stakeholders in systematic reviews.BackgroundThere is an expectation for stakeholders (including patients, the public, health professionals, and others) to be involved in research. Researchers are increasingly recognising that it is good practice to involve stakeholders in systematic reviews. There is currently a lack of evidence about (A) how to do this and (B) the effects, or impact, of such involvement. We aim to create a map of the evidence relating to stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews, and use this evidence to address the two points above.MethodsWe will complete a mixed-method synthesis of the evidence, first completing a scoping review to create a broad map of evidence relating to stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews, and secondly completing two contingent syntheses. We will use a stepwise approach to searching; the initial step will include comprehensive searches of electronic databases, including CENTRAL, AMED, Embase, Medline, Cinahl and other databases, supplemented with pre-defined hand-searching and contacting authors. Two reviewers will undertake each review task (i.e., screening, data extraction) using standard systematic review processes.For the scoping review, we will include any paper, regardless of publication status or study design, which investigates, reports or discusses involvement in a systematic review. Included papers will be summarised within structured tables. Criteria for judging the focus and comprehensiveness of the description of methods of involvement will be applied, informing which papers are included within the two contingent syntheses.Synthesis A will detail the methods that have been used to involve stakeholders in systematic reviews. Papers from the scoping review that are judged to provide an adequate description of methods or approaches will be included. Details of the methods of involvement will be extracted from included papers using pre-defined headings, presented in tables and described narratively.Synthesis B will include studies that explore the effect of stakeholder involvement on the quality, relevance or impact of a systematic review, as identified from the scoping review. Study quality will be appraised, data extracted and synthesised within tables.DiscussionThis review should help researchers select, improve and evaluate methods of involving stakeholders in systematic reviews. Review findings will contribute to Cochrane training resources.

Objectives and importance of study To summarise current evidence on the facilitators and barriers to offering vaping cessation support from the perspective of health professionals (HPs) with client-facing roles. Study type A scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Methods Six databases were searched for relevant peer-reviewed articles published in English between 2003 and 2024. All articles were screened by two reviewers independently, based on pre-specified eligibility criteria. Data extraction and analyses were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Results A total of 10,992 articles were screened; 21 publications met the inclusion criteria. Data extracted were mapped to the TDF (12 of the 14 domains were used). Barriers were more commonly reported than facilitators and included lack of knowledge, lack of training and competing priorities; the most commonly reported facilitators were HPs' sense of responsibility and willingness to provide e-cigarette cessation support. Most of the studies included were from the US and employed quantitative surveys. Most of the studies screened focused on the utility of e-cigarettes as cessation aids for combustible tobacco smoking, highlighting a gap in the interventional evidence on e-cigarette cessation. Conclusions More primary qualitative studies, including in Australia, are needed to understand the complexities of offering vaping cessation support. Although a range of HPs were represented in the review, further studies could analyse allied HPs' views separately from medical professionals' views.

Background: Robots are introduced in many health and social care settings.Objectives: To provide an overview of the existing evidence related to the views of nurses and other health and social care workers about the use of assistive humanoid and animal-like robots.Methods: Using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines we searched MEDLINE, PUBMED, CINHAL, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore digital library. Nineteen (19) articles met the criteria for inclusion.Results: Health care workers reported mixed views regarding the use of robots. They considered an array of tasks that robots could perform; they addressed the issue of patient safety and raised concerns about privacy.Conclusions: A limited number of studies have explored the views of health care workers about the use of robots. Considering the fast pace with which technology is advancing in the care field, it is critical to conduct more research in this area.Impact Statement: Robots will increasingly have a role to play in nursing, health and social care. The potential impact will be challenging for the healthcare workforce. It is therefore important for nurses and other health and social care workers to engage in discussion regarding the contribution of robots and their impact not only on nursing care but also on future roles of health and social care workers.

Objective: Employees’ management is the process of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling human resources within an organization, which is of great importance and it is necessary to pay attention to its various dimensions, including the provision, distribution, and retention of employees. In the present study, the challenges and problems in the field of personnel are examined and then solutions to reduce these challenges are discussed. Information sources and selected methods for study: A scoping review was conducted in August 2023 to identify the challenges faced by healthcare workers and suggest appropriate solutions. The search was performed across English-language databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, as well as Persian-language databases SID and Magiran, and search engines Google Scholar and Google. Title and abstract screening were independently carried out by three authors. After the screening and full-text review, data extraction was performed on 104 relevant studies. Data analysis was conducted using the Ritchie and Spencer framework analysis method. Results: A total of 27 challenges related to the healthcare workforce were identified and categorized into three domains: recruitment, distribution, and retention. The most critical challenges included unequal distribution of physicians, workforce shortages, job burnout, and migration of healthcare workers, all of which significantly impact the quality of healthcare services. Regarding workforce recruitment, key strategies included utilizing trainees, training non-specialist staff, and expanding educational capacities. To address distribution disparities, policies such as strengthening family physician programs, telemedicine, and offering financial incentives were proposed. In terms of workforce retention, effective solutions included welfare support, psychological counseling, stress management programs, and work-life balance initiatives. Conclusion: To improve the condition of health workers, policymakers must adopt an integrated, evidence-based approach addressing thethree areas of recruitment, distribution, and retention. Moreover, proposed strategies should be contextualized based on each country's economic, social, and cultural conditions and implemented through intersectoral collaboration and sufficient resource allocation to ensure long-term effectiveness.

Medical screening is a major driver of overdiagnosis, which should be considered when making an informed screening decision. Health professionals (HPs) often initiate screening and are therefore responsible for informing eligible screening participants about the benefits and harms of screening. However, little is known about HPs' knowledge of overdiagnosis and whether they are prepared to inform screening candidates about this risk and enable people to make an informed screening decision. This is a systematic review of studies examining HPs' knowledge and perception of overdiagnosis, whether it affects their position on offering screening, and their willingness to inform screening candidates about overdiagnosis. We conducted systematic searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycArticles without language restrictions. Two authors analysed the qualitative and quantitative data separately. Confidence in the findings of the qualitative data was assessed using the GRADE-CERQual approach. We included 23 publications after screening 9786 records. No studies directly examined HPs' knowledge of overdiagnosis. HPs' perceptions of overdiagnosis varied widely, from considering it a significant harm to seeing it as negligible. This seems linked to their overall beliefs about the benefits and harms of screening and to their position on offering screening, which varies from discouraging to actively promoting it. HPs also hold diverging approaches to informing screening candidates about overdiagnosis, from providing detailed explanations to limited or no information. There is a lack of research on HPs' knowledge of overdiagnosis, however, HPs who do know about overdiagnosis attribute substantially different levels of harm to it. This seems intertwined with their overall beliefs about the benefits of screening, their position towards offering screening, and their willingness to inform screening candidates about overdiagnosis. This has important implications for the public's right to evidence-based information and compromises an individual's right to make an informed screening decision.

Letter to the editor. Healthcare workers on the edge of sanity due to COVID-19: Rapid review of the results of systematic reviews and meta-analyzes

BackgroundCOVID-19-related conspiracy theories (CTs) have been observed among healthcare workers (HCWs). There exists, however, a lack of research investigating the extent, nature, and determinants of CTs among HCWs worldwide.MethodsA systematic literature search of Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL electronic databases (from inception to October 2023) was conducted for studies examining the prevalence and nature of COVID-19-related CTs among HCWs and health students and/or factors driving HCWs into believing these CTs.ResultsPrevalence rates of COVID-19-related CTs among HCWs varied widely across studies, ranging from 0.89% to 75.6%. These prevalence rates mainly concern vaccine-hesitant HCWs (although a minority of vaccinated HCWs also endorse CTs). Higher prevalence rates of CTs were found in the Arab world, Ethiopia, and Nigeria, compared to other African and Western countries. While in European countries and Northern America, an increased belief of HCWs in the “destabilization and power gain” narrative was found, African HCWs particularly endorsed the “population reduction” and “liberty restriction” narratives. Limited and heterogeneous data prevented conclusive findings on the relationship between CTs and sociodemographic factors, ethnicity, and psychological traits among HCWs. However, a consistent observation emerged regarding the level of education, indicating HCWs with higher educational attainment (e.g., physicians) tend to endorse CTs less frequently.ConclusionAlthough COVID-19-related CTs may be highly prevalent among vaccine-hesitant HCWs, gaps in understanding the drivers of CTs among HCWs remain. Given HCWs’ critical role in public health, especially during pandemics, further research is therefore essential.

A Global Call for Action to Prioritize Healthcare Worker Suicide Prevention During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond.

BackgroundRace-based health information is necessary to address disproportionate barriers racial communities face and to achieve optimal health outcomes. In Canada, Black people are disproportionately affected by HIV. There is an emerging body of literature on this topic, but a concise summary is lacking. There is a need to collectively and critically analyze research on HIV in the Black population in Canada to identify knowledge gaps and address this disproportionate burden.ObjectiveThe aim of this scoping review is to summarize the evidence on HIV and Black people in Canada. The main outcomes of interest are HIV prevalence, access to care, HIV prevention and treatment, the HIV care cascade, and related HIV outcomes. Through this scoping review, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the existing literature and highlight topics that need more investigation in future research.MethodsWe will conduct a scoping review of electronic databases using a systematic search strategy for qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods studies reporting on HIV and Black people in Canada. We will conduct our searches in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Google Scholar for literature published between 1985 and 2023. Gray literature, including government reports, dissertations, and other reports, will be included. Search results will be screened, and the full text of relevant literature will be retrieved. The extraction of data will be conducted independently by 2 reviewers. Consensus meetings will be held to resolve conflicts. Our results will be reported according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews).ResultsThe initial title and abstract review identified 447 articles. These articles will be critically appraised, and relevant information will be extracted. Information from these articles will be compared using charts and tables. Screening will start in November 2023, and we anticipate publishing the scoping review in June 2024.ConclusionsThe findings from this scoping review will help inform policy, practice, and research on HIV and Black people in Canada.International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)PRR1-10.2196/49066

The objective of this review was to synthesize the experiences of health professionals who have experienced grief as a result of a pediatric patient dying. There has been some research into health professionals' grief experiences associated with the death of pediatric patients, but there has not been a review that synthesizes the findings of these experiences. Other related reviews have focused on prenatal, perinatal or adult deaths or the coping strategies employed by health professionals. This review highlights the complexities of experiences faced by pediatric health professionals. Qualitative studies involving pediatric health professionals working in any healthcare setting who had experienced grief from the death of a patient were considered for inclusion. Studies were conducted in any country, at any time and published in English. The search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. The search was completed in January 2019. The review followed principles of meta-aggregation in line with the JBI approach. Methodological quality assessment was based on representation of participants' voices and congruence between research methodology and both research question and analysis of data. Meta-aggregation led to three synthesized findings from 12 qualitative studies that met the inclusion and methodological quality criteria. Studies predominantly included nurses working in a hospital, with sample sizes ranging from six to 25 participants. The synthesized findings were physical, behavioral, psychological or spiritual symptoms; compounding grief; and alleviating grief. Physical, behavioral, psychological, or spiritual symptoms highlighted the various characteristics of grief experiences by health professionals. Compounding grief was the largest synthesized finding and incorporated the various factors that contributed to a poorer experience of grief. Alleviating grief showed the limited identified factors that improved the experience of grief. Methodological quality led to synthesized findings receiving a ConQual rating of low or moderate. The synthesized findings from this review highlight the varied reported experiences of grief in health professionals. The methodological quality and reporting of studies, however, led to decreased confidence in the synthesized findings and recommendations arising from this review. Healthcare professionals should be aware of the potential for experiencing grief when a patient dies and the compounding and alleviating factors associated with this. Further research could expand participant and language limitations, and improve methodological quality and reporting.