BACKGROUND: Dysmenorrhea, or menstrual pain, is a subjective experience, and can only be assessed by patient-reported outcomes. These instruments should be reliable, valid and responsive.
OBJECTIVE: To identify and critically appraise the available evidence for the measurement properties of specific patient-reported outcome measures used for dysmenorrhea.
METHODS: The PRISMA statement was used to report this systematic review. Databases searched were PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Web of Science, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar (April 2021; updated on February 2023). Original studies with primary data collection, with no restriction on language and publication date that reported psychometric properties of one or more dysmenorrhea-related patient-reported outcome measure. The literature searches, selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias were performed independently by two reviewers and followed the COSMIN guidelines.
RESULTS: Thirty studies were analysed in this review, and 19 patient-reported outcome measures were evaluated. The instruments varied in relation to the measured construct and measurement properties (validity, reliability and responsiveness). The methodological quality of the studies and the quality of evidence of the patient-reported outcome measures were variable. Among the 13 studies that reported the development of patient-reported outcome measures, most had inadequate methodological quality, and the overall rating was insufficient or inconsistent.
CONCLUSIONS: The Dysmenorrhea Symptom Interference (DSI) scale was the only identified patient-reported outcome measure that has the potential to be recommended because of its sufficient rating combined with moderate quality of evidence for content validity. Future studies should further evaluate the measurement properties of the existing patient-reported outcome measures, or develop new patient-reported outcome measures following the COSMIN methodology.
UNASSIGNED: Not applicable as this is a systematic review.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO protocol: CRD42021244410. Registration on April 22, 2021.

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Identification of at-risk patients is paramount to initiate preventive care and tailor treatments accordingly. Despite international guidelines recommending all patients with RA undergo CVD risk assessment, rates remain suboptimal. The objectives of this review were to map the strategies used to conduct CVD risk assessments in patients with RA in routine care, determine who delivers CVD risk assessments, and identify what composite measures are used. The Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidelines were used. A literature search was conducted in electronic and grey literature databases, trial registries, medical clearing houses, and professional rheumatology organisations. Findings were synthesised narratively. A total of 12 studies were included. Strategies reported in this review used various system-based interventions to support delivery of CVD risk assessments in patients with RA, operationalised in different ways, adopting two approaches: (a) multidisciplinary collaboration, and (b) education. Various composite measures were cited in use, with and without adjustment for RA. Results from this review demonstrate that although several strategies to support CVD risk assessments in patients with RA are cited in the literature, there is limited evidence to suggest a standardised model has been applied to routine care. Furthermore, extensive evidence to map how health care professionals conduct CVD risk assessments in practice is lacking. Research needs to be undertaken to establish the extent to which healthcare professionals are CVD risk assessing their patients with RA in routine care. Key Points • A limited number of system-based interventions are in use to support the delivery of CVD risk assessments in patients with RA. • Multidisciplinary team collaboration, and education are used to operationalise interventions to support Health Care Professionals in conducting CVD risk assessments in practice. • The extent to which Health Care Professionals are CVD risk assessing their patients with RA needs to be established.

BACKGROUND: A comprehensive patient assessment is essential for safe patient care. Patient assessment frameworks for nurses are generally restricted to patients who already have altered vital signs and are at risk of deterioration, or to specific risks or body systems such as falls, pressure injury and the Glasgow Coma Score. Comprehensive and structured evidence-based nursing assessment frameworks that consider the whole patient and extend beyond vital signs, specific risks and single systems are not routinely used in inpatient settings but are important to establish early risks for patient deterioration.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to identify nursing assessment tools or frameworks used to holistically assess hospitalized patients and to identify the impact of these tools on patient and health service outcomes.
METHODS: A scoping literature review was conducted. Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis, Embase and Scopus were databases used in the search. The initial search was conducted in August 2021 and repeated in November 2022. No date parameters were set. The Participants, Concept, Context (PCC) framework was used to guide the development of the research question and consolidate inclusion and exclusion criteria. The PRISMA-ScR Checklist Item was followed to ensure a methodologically sound checklist was used.
RESULTS: Ten primary research studies evaluating six nursing assessment frameworks were included. Of the five nursing assessment frameworks, none were explicitly designed for general ward nursing, but rather the emergency department or specific patient cohorts, such as oncology. Four studies reported on reliability and/or validity; two reported on patient outcomes and four on staff satisfaction.
CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based nursing patient assessment frameworks for use in general inpatient wards are lacking. Existing assessment tools are largely designed for specific patient cohorts, specific body systems or the already deteriorating patient.
UNASSIGNED: A framework to enable a structured approach to patient assessment in this environment is needed for patient safety, consistency in assessment, nursing staff enablement and confidence to escalate care. Routine systematic nursing assessment could also aid timely patient escalation.
CONCLUSIONS: What problem did the study address? This study addresses the lack of evidence-based nursing assessment frameworks for use in hospitalized patients. The impact of this is that it highlights the need for an evidence-based, whole of patient assessment framework for use by nurses for patients admitted to a ward environment. What were the main findings? This review identified limited comprehensive, patient assessment frameworks for use in general ward inpatient areas. Those identified were not validated for this patient cohort and are aimed at patients already deteriorating. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? This review has the potential to impact future research and patient care. It highlights that most research is focussed on processes to detect and escalate care for the already deteriorating patient. There is a need for an evidence-based routine nursing assessment framework for patients admitted to a ward environment to promote positive patient outcomes and prevent deterioration.
UNASSIGNED: This review contributes to existing knowledge of nursing patient assessment frameworks, yet it also highlights several gaps. Currently, there are no known, validated, holistic, structured nursing patient assessment frameworks for use in general ward inpatient settings. However, areas that do use such assessment frameworks (e.g. the emergency department) have shown positive patient outcomes and staff usability. Hospitalized ward patients would benefit from routine, structured nursing assessments targeting positive patient outcomes prior to the onset of deterioration.

This article will discuss chronic limb ischaemia as the result of peripheral artery disease (PAD) using a case study. The patient\'s concurrent diagnosis of metastases meant clinical decision making was complex and treatment options were limited. PAD is the third most common clinical presentation of atherosclerosis after coronary artery disease and stroke. Although advances in radiological technology and biochemical screening offer the potential for earlier intervention and improved survival rates for patients with PAD, a review of the evidence suggests that commitment to more conservative approaches, such as exercise therapy and health promotion, could have more sustainable, longer-term benefits for patients with chronic limb ischaemia. The therapeutic nature of the nurse-patient relationship makes nurses ideally placed for encouraging lifestyle changes and signposting to support services. Active participation from the patient is imperative for any potential modifications, which should be individualised as part of a holistic care plan, to ensure patient engagement and compliance. Therefore emphasis should remain on the management and prevention of modifiable risk factors, for which the nurse\'s role is an integral part to ensure success.

Frailty is a syndrome involving increased vulnerability that usually develops from age-related decline in physiological reserves and function in multiple organ systems, resulting in an impaired ability to respond to acute changes in health conditions. It is imperative that healthcare providers who work with older adults in primary care and community settings understand how to assess frailty and can identify appropriate interventions. This article reports the results of a rapid review that examined how frailty is assessed in community-dwelling older adults and what interventions are used to address frailty in this population.

The purpose of this integrative review was to evaluate the literature from January 2013 to April 2020 and to explore critical care nurses\' perspectives of and intent to use recommended Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption (PADIS) patient assessment tools in adult critical care units. A literature search was performed with a total of 47 studies included in the final analysis for this review. The studies\' data were organized and further reduced based on The Reasoned Action Approach behavioral theory to reflect the extent to which a nurse plans to use a PADIS assessment tool. Extracted themes were related to behavioral beliefs in patient-centered care and critical thinking; normative beliefs about communication and prioritization; and control beliefs concerning autonomy and confidence. Contextualizing the international phenomenon of variation in PADIS assessment tool use by critical care nurses provides a deeper understanding of its complexity for use in the clinical setting.

NHS continuing healthcare is a package of care that is arranged and funded solely by the NHS where an individual has been found to have a \'primary health need\'. Individuals who may be eligible have a right to be assessed for NHS continuing healthcare, and this assessment is undertaken by healthcare professionals using a national framework. However, there is a lack of literature on continuing healthcare and its assessment process. The aim was to review the literature on undertaking and providing continuing healthcare in terms of workforce roles, education and training, and competencies. A literature search was undertaken to identify relevant literature on continuing healthcare. Primary searching of electronic internal databases and indices at the Royal College of Nursing and King\'s College London was used, alongside a further database search and hand searching. A narrative synthesis of the literature was used to synthesise the findings, and a thematic analysis was undertaken to identify themes from the literature. The literature search identified 100 articles, of which 84 were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria or provided insufficient details in the abstract. A total of 18 articles were included and examined in detail. Four themes were identified in the literature: complexity of care in transitioning care from hospital to home; different care models; importance of education of healthcare professionals; and role of continuing healthcare. Healthcare professionals - including nurses - should receive further training in caring for older people, especially in relation to continuing healthcare. Since there is an increasing ageing population, there is an increasing requirement for continuing healthcare, and thus further research examining all aspects of this care is required.

OBJECTIVE: To describe what is currently known about nurses\' assessment decisions when providing care to patients at home or in their usual place of residence.
METHODS: In August 2018, an integrative literature review using a systematic approach was conducted using specific search terms to search Informit, MEDLINE and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). The literature search was not limited by date, and included published papers or unpublished dissertations written between 1980 and 2018.
RESULTS: In total 25 full papers were assessed for inclusion in this review; seven met the inclusion criteria. Three themes were identified from this review: i) nurse education and experience; ii) assessment informing decision-making and iii) knowing the patient.
CONCLUSIONS: Nurses\' education, experience, abilities, prior learning, beliefs, attitudes and values are key factors in the delivery of home-based nursing care, and strongly influence how assessments, clinical judgements and decisions are made. Impact Statement: An understanding of home based nurses\' decisions and response to clinical deterioration is needed to inform Hospital in the Home nursing-specific curricula.

The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is a well-established assessment tool for measuring symptom severity in schizophrenia. Researchers and clinicians have been interested in the development of a short version of the PANSS that could reduce the burden of its administration for patients and raters. The author presents a comprehensive overview of existing brief PANSS measures, including their strengths and limitations, and discusses some possible next steps. There are two available scales that offer a reduced number of original PANSS items: PANSS-14 and PANSS-19; and two shorter versions that include six items: Brief PANSS and PANSS-6. The PANSS-6 has been tested quite extensively in established trials and appears to demonstrate high sensitivity to change and an established cut off definition for remission. Prospective testing in new antipsychotic treatment trials is still required for these shorter versions of PANSS. In addition, they need to be supplemented with interview guides, as well as provide conversion formulas to translate total scores from the short PANSS versions to the PANSS-30. Both short versions of the PANSS are essentially designed to evaluate response to antipsychotic treatment. Future PANSS scale development needs to address specific measurement of treatment-responsive positive symptoms by including treatment-sensitive items, as well as illness-phase specific PANSS tools.

Availability of normative patient outcome data may assist in designing experiments and estimating sample sizes. The purpose of this review was to determine normative ranges for colonic transit time (CTT), Patient Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms (PAC-SYM), and Patient Assessment of Constipation-Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) in adults diagnosed with functional constipation per Rome III guidelines. Pooled estimates were derived from random-effects meta-analysis. Meta-regression was used to explore sources of heterogeneity among studies. A total of 24 studies (3786 patients) were included in the review. In 10 studies with 1119 patients, pooled CTT was 58 hours (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50-65 hours). Publication bias was not evident (Egger P = .51); heterogeneity was high (I2 = 92%, P < .001). In meta-regression, geographical location explained 57% of the between-study variance, with CTT significantly longer in studies conducted in Europe (71 hours) compared with Asia (49 hours) or the Americas (44 hours). In 9 studies with 2061 patients, pooled PAC-SYM was 1.70 (95% CI: 1.58-1.83). Publication bias was not evident (Egger P = .44). Heterogeneity was high (I2 = 90%, P < .001); however, no study or patient factor influenced PAC-SYM in meta-regression. In 12 studies with 1805 patients, pooled PAC-QOL was 1.97 (95% CI: 1.70-2.24). Publication bias was not evident (Egger P = .28); heterogeneity was high (I2 = 98%, P < .001). In meta-regression, age explained 52% of the between-study variance, with older age associated with lower PAC-QOL scores. Overall, in adults diagnosed with functional constipation per Rome III criteria, significant heterogeneity in CTT, PAC-SYM, and PAC-QOL exists among studies. Variability among studies may be explained by geography and patient factors.