In this chapter, the authors reflect on their experience with the BNDU model from the perspectives of their associate nurse roles at Burford. This account reflects their personal involvement in practice using the model. The role of the associate nurse is essentially to follow the prescribed care planned by the primary nurse and to respond to changing circumstances in the absence of the primary nurse as appropriate. However, from the perspective of associate nurses who may be part-time, or newly qualified, or returning from practice following a break, using the BNDU model may be more challenging. These nurses may be lacking in confidence. To get the best out of the model requires nurses to be creative and this often means taking risks and exposing themselves. This requires an enabling type of leadership. The starting point to working creatively with the BNDU model is to examine one's personal philosophy of nursing.

AIM:We aim to explore healthful leadership practices in nursing and midwifery evident within the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom, the contextual facilitators, barriers and outcomes.BACKGROUND:Globally, the health and care sectors are under pressure and despite nurses and other professionals, demonstrating resilience and resourcefulness in the COVID-19 pandemic; this has negatively impacted on their health and wellbeing and on patient care.EVALUATION:Two searches were conducted in July 2021 and December 2021. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were identified to refine the search, including papers written since the beginning of the pandemic in 2020. A total of 38 papers were included principally from the United States and United Kingdom. Ten were research papers; the others were commentaries, opinion pieces and editorials. MS Teams literature repository was created. A unique critical appraisal tool was devised to capture contexts, mechanisms and outcomes whilst reflecting more standardized tools, that is, the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme and the Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Objectivity and Date tool for reviewing grey literature to refine the search further.KEY ISSUES:Six tentative theories of healthful leadership emerged from the literature around leadership strategies, which are relational, being visible and present; being open and engaging; caring for self and others; embodying values; being prepared and preparing others; and using available information and support. Contextual factors that enable healthful leadership practices are in the main, created by leaders' values, attributes and style. The literature suggests that leaders who embody values of compassion, empathy, courage and authenticity create conditions for positive and healthful relations between leaders and others. Nurse and midwives' voices are however absent from the literature in this review.CONCLUSION:Current available literature would suggest healthful leadership practices are not prioritized by nurse leaders. Perspectives of nurses' and midwives' about the impact of such practices on their wellbeing is also missing. Tentative theories are offered as a means of identifying healthful leadership strategies, the context that enable these and potential outcomes for nurses and midwives. These will be explored in phase two of this study.IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT:Nurse leaders must be adequately prepared to create working environments that support nurses' and midwives' wellbeing, so that they may be able to provide high-quality care. Ensuring a supportive organizational culture, which embodies the values of healthfulness, may help to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on nurses' and midwives' wellbeing in the immediate aftermath and going forward.

Objectives of study stage 1 were to: explore people's experiences of illness due to COVID-19 while feeling socially isolated or socially isolating; identify perceptions of what would support recovery; and synthesise insights into recommendations for supporting people after COVID-19. Study stage 2 objectives were to engage stakeholders in evaluating these recommendations and analyse likely influences on access to the support identified. DESIGN:A two-stage, multimethod cross-sectional study was conducted from a postpositivist perspective. Stage 1 included an international online survey of people's experiences of illness, particularly COVID-19, in isolation (n=675 full responses). Stage 2 involved a further online survey (n=43), two tweetchats treated as large online focus groups (n=60 and n=27 people tweeting), two smaller focus groups (both n=4) and one interview (both using MS teams). SETTING:Stage 1 had an international emphasis, although 87% of respondents were living in the UK. Stage 2 focused on the UK. PARTICIPANTS:Anyone aged 18+ and able to complete a survey in English could participate. Stage 2 included health professionals, advocates and people with lived experience. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Descriptive data and response categories derived from open responses to the survey and the qualitative data. RESULTS:Of those responding fully to stage 1 (mean age 44 years); 130 (19%) had experienced COVID-19 in isolation; 45 had recovered, taking a mean of 5.3 (range 1-54) weeks. 85 did not feel they had recovered; fatigue and varied 'other' symptoms were most prevalent and also had most substantial negative impacts. Our draft recommendations were highly supported by respondents to stage 2 and refined to produce final recommendations. CONCLUSIONS:Recommendations support access to progressive intensity and specialism of support, addressing access barriers that might inadvertently increase health inequalities. Multidisciplinary collaboration and learning are crucial, including the person with COVID-19 and/or Long Covid in the planning and decision making throughout.

Realist evaluation provides a general method of evaluating the application of interventions including policy, legislation, projects, and new processes in social settings such as law enforcement, healthcare and education. Realist evaluation focuses on what about interventions works, for whom, and in what circumstances, and there is a growing body of work using realist evaluation to analyse interventions in healthcare organizations, including those using Lean Six Sigma improvement methodologies. Whilst realist evaluation facilitates the analysis of interventions using both qualitative and quantitative research, there is little guidance given on methods of data collection and analysis. The purpose of this study is to address this lack of guidance through detailing the use of innovative person-centred methods of data collection and analysis in a realist evaluation that enabled us to understand the contribution of Lean Six Sigma to person-centred care and cultures. This use of person-centred principles in the adjudication of identified program theories has informed novel methods of collecting and analysing data in realist evaluation that facilitate a person-centred approach to working with research participants and a way of making the implicit explicit when adjudicating program theory.

Abstract Background A lack of standardisation of documentation accompanying older people when transferring from residential to acute care is common and this may result in gaps in information and in care for older people. In Ireland, this lack of standardisation prompted the development of an evidence based national transfer document. Objectives To pilot a new national transfer document for use when transferring older people from residential to acute care and obtain the perceptions of its use from staff in residential and acute care settings. Methods This was a pre‐ and post‐study design using purposive sampling following the STROBE guidelines. The pilot was conducted in 26 sites providing residential care and three university hospitals providing acute care. Pre‐pilot questionnaires focused on current documentation and were distributed to staff in residential care (n = 875). A pilot of the new paper‐based transfer document was then conducted over three months and post‐pilot questionnaires distributed to staff from both residential and acute care settings (n = 1085). The findings of the pilot study were discussed with multidisciplinary expert advisory and stakeholder groups who recommended some revisions. This consensus informed the development of the final design of the new revised transfer document. Results Pre‐pilot: 23% response rate; 83% (n = 168) participants agreed/strongly agreed that existing documentation was straightforward to complete but could be more person‐centred. Post‐pilot: 11% response rate; 75% (n = 93) of participants agreed/strongly agreed that the new transfer document promoted person‐centred care but recommended revisions to the new document regarding layout and time to complete. Conclusions This study highlighted some of the challenges of providing safe, effective and relevant transfer information that is feasible and usable in everyday practice. Implications for practice Standardisation and being person‐centred are important determining factors in the provision of relevant up to date information on the resident being transferred.

Background: The recent COVID-19 pandemic increased pressure upon healthcare resources resulting in compromised health services. Enforced national lockdown led to people being unable to access essential services in addition to limiting contact with social support networks. The novel coronavirus, and subsequent condition known as long covid were not well-understood and clinicians were not supported by existing guidelines or pathways. Our study explored people's experiences of healthcare during this period with a person-centered “lens.”Methods: Ninety-seven people participated in our online survey about their experiences of the pandemic, particularly while socially isolated and their experiences of healthcare. Following completion of the survey, 11 of these participants agreed to further semi-structured interviews to explore this further in their own words. Interview conversations were transcribed, checked; together with the responses to open questions in the survey. The data were then analyzed thematically by members of the research team. We conducted framework analysis from a post-positivist perspective, using the Person-centered Practice Framework to explore participants' experiences.Results: There were few examples of people describing person-centered care. People experienced barriers to accessing support, and negative experiences of care that represented complexities enacting person-centered care at each level of the framework (processes, practice environment, prerequisites, and macro context). These barriers were influenced greatly by the pandemic, for example, with health professionals being harder to access. Some experiences related to the ways in which health professionals responded to the context, for example, positive examples included active listening, recognition of people's experiences, seeking to find out more, and engaging in collaborative problem-solving.Discussion: People want to feel heard, supported to navigate healthcare systems, source trustworthy information, find appropriate services, and collaborate in learning and problem-solving with healthcare professionals. There have been enormous challenges to the provision of healthcare throughout the pandemic. Moving forward is crucial with emphasis on overcoming barriers to person-centered healthcare. This should focus on steps now and also in planning for the possibility of further rapid changes in the demand for and provision of healthcare.

A lack of fidelity to Lean Six Sigma's (LSS) philosophical roots can create division between person-centred approaches to transforming care experiences and services, and system wide quality improvement methods focused solely on efficiency and clinical outcomes. There is little research into, and a poor understanding of, the mechanisms and processes through which LSS education influences healthcare staffs' person-centred practice. This realist inquiry asks 'whether, to what extent and in what ways, LSS in healthcare contributes to person-centred care and cultures'. Realist review identified three potential Context, Mechanism, Outcome configurations (CMOcs) explaining how LSS influenced practice, relating to staff, patients, and organisational influences. Realist evaluation was used to explore the CMOc relating to staff, showing how they interacted with a LSS education Programme (the intervention) with CMOc adjudication by the research team and study participants to determine whether, to what extent, and in what ways it influenced person-centred cultures. Three more focused CMOcs emerged from the adjudication of the CMOc relating to staff, and these were aligned to previously identified synergies and divergences between participants' LSS practice and person-centred cultures. This enabled us to understand the contribution of LSS to person-centred care and cultures that contribute to the evidence base on the study of quality improvement beyond intervention effectiveness alone.

Background: There appears to be a gap in the literature with regard to nursing students’ participation in designing learning resources to prepare them for the reality of clinical placements. In addition, the existing research on preparation focuses on skills competency and overlooks the emotional preparation required to navigate the practice context, while preparation of early-year students is not prioritised. Aim: This study had two aims: to provide nursing students with processes and tools to give them a voice in the development of learning resources to prepare for clinical placement; and to address some of the power imbalances between nursing students and clinical supervisors. Methods: This action research study was undertaken collaboratively with students and academic staff as co-researchers and was underpinned by the theoretical perspectives of transformational learning and person-centredness. It used a range of creative methods, such as workshops, critical creativity and critical dialogue. Conclusion: Emotional connection and vulnerability were found to enhance healthful (supervisory) relationships. The co-researchers developed a Student-Led Conversation Form and a process to support students to undertake and lead a conversation with their clinical supervisors and create shared values. Significantly, emotional preparation for clinical placements was found to be important for nursing students facing the reality of practice. Implications for practice: • Innovative approaches to curriculum development are enabled when academic staff authentically engage with nursing students • First-year nursing students experience a sense of empowerment when they engage in student-led learning • Person-centred learning requires academic staff and nursing students to be challenged to develop emotional literacy skills

Background: This paper discusses if and how the improvement sciences of Lean Six Sigma and person-centred approaches can be melded or blended in the health care context. The discussion highlights the relationship between each approach to improvement science in terms of their respective purposes, intentions and probable outcomes; positioning these as either synergies or divergences. Comparison of the key theoretical and methodological principles underpinning each approach to improvement is also considered and implications for future practice, policy and research are drawn out. The discussion is informed by part of the findings of a realist review of relevant literature.

Background: In the associated article in this special issue of the International Practice Development Journal, Phelan et al. (2020) offer an analysis of the global positioning of person-centredness from a strategic policy perspective. This second article, an international person-centred education curriculum development initiative, builds on that foundational work. It outlines the systematic, rigorous processes adopted by academics from five European countries to analyse stakeholder data, theoretically frame the data, and thereby identify philosophical and pedagogical principles to inform the development of person-centred curriculum frameworks. Aim: To identify key principles that have the potential to create an international curriculum framework for the education of person-centred healthcare practitioners. Methods: A hermeneutic praxis methodological approach was used, where multiple rounds of data analyses were conducted. These were initially undertaken in each country, then collaboratively with partners, while engaging with other forms of evidence. Findings: The project group generated a set of principles embedded in four philosophical dimensions: (i) transformative; (ii) co-constructed; (iii) relational; and (iv) pragmatic. The purpose of the curriculum was identified as being transformative, facilitating journeying through knowing, doing, being and becoming a competent and committed person-centred practitioner. A person-centred curriculum is built on a philosophy of pragmatism, adopts a co-constructionist approach to curriculum design and implementation, and encourages connectivity with self, other persons and contexts. Pedagogical principles, aligned to the four philosophical dimensions, identified the required learning environment, and the learning, teaching and assessment approaches required to educate person-centred healthcare practitioners. Conclusion: This article represents steps to foster a more focused and engaging way of implicitly and explicitly embedding person-centred care in curricula. Our theoretical framework has enabled us to consider the different layers of practice while staying true to the purpose of curriculum design. The presentation of the framework in this article makes it available for wider critique to those with an interest in this area of study. Implications for practice: The draft framework provides an opportunity for curriculum teams to critically reflect on and have dialogue around current curricula Person-centred curricula have the potential to improve service-user experiences of care Prepared person-centred practitioners will contribute to person-centred cultures Students and practitioners will experience person-centredness Practitioners will be bold and innovative

The Workplace Cultural Critical Assessment Tool (WCCAT) is a participant observational tool developed a decade ago to capture evidence about workplace culture that can then be used to support practice development initiatives. The WCCAT has been applied extensively across the world in a range of healthcare settings. Since its inception, practice development has progressed and it is now explicitly linked to advancing person-centred cultures. With this in mind, it seemed timely to revise the WCCAT to reflect the progress made within practice development, and strategically link the tool to person-centred practice and achieving person-centred outcomes. This revision (WCCAT®) has been undertaken by members of the International Community of Practice (the authors of this article), whose focus is person-centred practice research. This article outlines the process undertaken for the revision and for the alignment of the revised tool with the Person-centred Practice Framework. Guidance is provided on when, why and how to use the tool to capture participant observational data that highlights evidence of person-centred practice. Detailed information and cues to support the observer in collecting and analysing data are provided, along with suggestions for facilitating feedback of data and subsequent action planning to support changes in practice. The benefits and limitations of using the WCCAT® are outlined.

Nursing PhilosophyVolume 21, Issue 2 e12299 EDITORIAL Editorial paper Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, RNT, Corresponding Author Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, RNT JDewing@qmu.ac.uk Division of Nursing, Centre for Person-centred Practice Research School of Health Sciences, Queen Margaret University, EdinburghSearch for more papers by this author Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, RNT, Corresponding Author Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, RNT JDewing@qmu.ac.uk Division of Nursing, Centre for Person-centred Practice Research School of Health Sciences, Queen Margaret University, EdinburghSearch for more papers by this author First published: 08 April 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.12299Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume21, Issue2April 2020e12299 RelatedInformation

Nursing PhilosophyVolume 21, Issue 3 e12315 EDITORIAL Editorial: Privilege and the call of the appeal Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, RNT, Corresponding Author Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, RNT JDewing@qmu.ac.uk Division of Nursing, Centre for Person-centred Practice Research School of Health Sciences, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, UKSearch for more papers by this author Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, RNT, Corresponding Author Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, RNT JDewing@qmu.ac.uk Division of Nursing, Centre for Person-centred Practice Research School of Health Sciences, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, UKSearch for more papers by this author First published: 24 July 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.12315Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume21, Issue3July 2020e12315 RelatedInformation

AIMS:To evaluate the mechanism through which nursing leadership impacts patient safety.BACKGROUND:Patient safety has received considerable attention among policymakers, governments and public sectors with the emphasis in health care settings on minimizing the risk to patients. Claims are made leadership plays a crucial role in patient safety. However, the incidents of adverse events are consistently high in hospitals.EVALUATION:Published English-only research articles that examine the mechanism by which nursing leadership impacts patient safety were selected from seven electronic databases and manual searches. Data extraction, quality assessments and analysis were completed for ten research studies.KEY ISSUES:There is evidence of significant mediating effects between nursing leadership and decreased adverse patient outcomes specifically with regard to workplace empowerment, leader-nurse relationship and the quality of the care environment.CONCLUSION:The findings suggest that nursing leadership has a significant indirect impact on patient safety outcomes. From a person-centred perspective, the care environment requires workplace empowerment and effective relationships between leaders and nurses.IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT:To improve patient safety outcomes, managers must strive to emphasize workplace empowerment, leader-nurse relationship and the quality of the care environment. Managers must consider these domains as part of an effective workplace culture.

Journal of Nursing ScholarshipVolume 52, Issue 5 p. 459-461 Guest Editorial The Need for Visible Nursing Leadership During COVID-19 Elizabeth Rosser DPhil, MN, Dip N Ed, Dip RM, RN, RM, RNT, PFHEA, Corresponding Author Elizabeth Rosser DPhil, MN, Dip N Ed, Dip RM, RN, RM, RNT, PFHEA [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-2548-4924 Phi Mu, Emeritus Professor, Bournemouth University, Lansdowne Campus, Bournemouth, Dorset, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorLiz Westcott DCM, MSc, Dip Man, RNT, RGN, Liz Westcott DCM, MSc, Dip Man, RNT, RGN Phi Mu, Executive Coach and Coaching Supervisor, NMC Test of Competence Assessor, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorParveen A. Ali PhD, MScN, RGN, SFHEA, FRSA, Parveen A. Ali PhD, MScN, RGN, SFHEA, FRSA orcid.org/0000-0002-7839-8130 Phi Mu, Senior Lecturer, Health Sciences School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorJoanne Bosanquet MBE, RN, RHV, Joanne Bosanquet MBE, RN, RHV Phi Mu, Chief Executive, Foundation of Nursing Studies, London, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorEnrique Castro-Sanchez PhD, MPH, BSc, RGN, DipTropNurs, PgDip, DLSHTM, FEANS, Enrique Castro-Sanchez PhD, MPH, BSc, RGN, DipTropNurs, PgDip, DLSHTM, FEANS orcid.org/0000-0002-3351-9496 Phi Mu, Lecturer in Adult Nursing, City University of London, and NIHR 70@70 Senior Nurse Research Leader, NIHR Academy, London, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorJan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, Dip NursEd, Dip Nurs, Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, Dip NursEd, Dip Nurs orcid.org/0000-0002-7968-2213 Omega Xi, Sue Pembrey Chair in Nursing & Director of Centre for Person-Centred Practice Research, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UKSearch for more papers by this authorBrendan McCormack D.Phil(Oxon.), BSc(Hons.) Nursing,FRCN, FEANS, FRCSI, PGCEA, RMN, RGN, FAAN, Brendan McCormack D.Phil(Oxon.), BSc(Hons.) Nursing,FRCN, FEANS, FRCSI, PGCEA, RMN, RGN, FAAN orcid.org/0000-0001-8525-8905 Omega Xi, Head of the Divisions of Nursing, Occupational Therapy and Arts Therapies and Associate Director Centre for Person-Centred Practice Research, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UKSearch for more papers by this authorJoy Merrell PhD, MSc, BSc(Hons) Nursing, RGN, RHV, RNT, HV Tut Cert, Joy Merrell PhD, MSc, BSc(Hons) Nursing, RGN, RHV, RNT, HV Tut Cert orcid.org/0000-0003-1205-2628 Upsilon Xi-at-Large, Professor of Public Health Nursing, Swansea University, Swansea, Wales, UKSearch for more papers by this authorGary Witham PhD, RN, Pg Cert Palliative Care, Pg Cert, BA(Hons), Gary Witham PhD, RN, Pg Cert Palliative Care, Pg Cert, BA(Hons) orcid.org/0000-0002-8575-7533 Phi Mu, Senior Lecturer in Nursing, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, EnglandSearch for more papers by this author Elizabeth Rosser DPhil, MN, Dip N Ed, Dip RM, RN, RM, RNT, PFHEA, Corresponding Author Elizabeth Rosser DPhil, MN, Dip N Ed, Dip RM, RN, RM, RNT, PFHEA [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-2548-4924 Phi Mu, Emeritus Professor, Bournemouth University, Lansdowne Campus, Bournemouth, Dorset, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorLiz Westcott DCM, MSc, Dip Man, RNT, RGN, Liz Westcott DCM, MSc, Dip Man, RNT, RGN Phi Mu, Executive Coach and Coaching Supervisor, NMC Test of Competence Assessor, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorParveen A. Ali PhD, MScN, RGN, SFHEA, FRSA, Parveen A. Ali PhD, MScN, RGN, SFHEA, FRSA orcid.org/0000-0002-7839-8130 Phi Mu, Senior Lecturer, Health Sciences School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorJoanne Bosanquet MBE, RN, RHV, Joanne Bosanquet MBE, RN, RHV Phi Mu, Chief Executive, Foundation of Nursing Studies, London, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorEnrique Castro-Sanchez PhD, MPH, BSc, RGN, DipTropNurs, PgDip, DLSHTM, FEANS, Enrique Castro-Sanchez PhD, MPH, BSc, RGN, DipTropNurs, PgDip, DLSHTM, FEANS orcid.org/0000-0002-3351-9496 Phi Mu, Lecturer in Adult Nursing, City University of London, and NIHR 70@70 Senior Nurse Research Leader, NIHR Academy, London, EnglandSearch for more papers by this authorJan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, Dip NursEd, Dip Nurs, Jan Dewing PhD, MA, MN, BSc, RN, Dip NursEd, Dip Nurs orcid.org/0000-0002-7968-2213 Omega Xi, Sue Pembrey Chair in Nursing & Director of Centre for Person-Centred Practice Research, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UKSearch for more papers by this authorBrendan McCormack D.Phil(Oxon.), BSc(Hons.) Nursing,FRCN, FEANS, FRCSI, PGCEA, RMN, RGN, FAAN, Brendan McCormack D.Phil(Oxon.), BSc(Hons.) Nursing,FRCN, FEANS, FRCSI, PGCEA, RMN, RGN, FAAN orcid.org/0000-0001-8525-8905 Omega Xi, Head of the Divisions of Nursing, Occupational Therapy and Arts Therapies and Associate Director Centre for Person-Centred Practice Research, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UKSearch for more papers by this authorJoy Merrell PhD, MSc, BSc(Hons) Nursing, RGN, RHV, RNT, HV Tut Cert, Joy Merrell PhD, MSc, BSc(Hons) Nursing, RGN, RHV, RNT, HV Tut Cert orcid.org/0000-0003-1205-2628 Upsilon Xi-at-Large, Professor of Public Health Nursing, Swansea University, Swansea, Wales, UKSearch for more papers by this authorGary Witham PhD, RN, Pg Cert Palliative Care, Pg Cert, BA(Hons), Gary Witham PhD, RN, Pg Cert Palliative Care, Pg Cert, BA(Hons) orcid.org/0000-0002-8575-7533 Phi Mu, Senior Lecturer in Nursing, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, EnglandSearch for more papers by this author First published: 07 July 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12587Citations: 47Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. References Shwu-Feng, T., Ching-Chiu, K., Hsiu-Hung, W., & Chia-Chin, L. (2020). Nursing's response to covid-19: Lessons learned from SARS in Taiwan. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 108, 103587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.i.nursstu.2020.103587. Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32388221/ 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103587 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar World Health Organization. (2020a). State of the world's nursing 2020: Investing in education, jobs and leadership. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/rosse/AppData/Local/Packages/Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe/TempState/Downloads/9789240003279-eng%20(1).pdf Google Scholar World Health Organization. (2020b). The year of the nurse and midwife. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news-room/campaigns/year-of-the-nurse-and-the-midwife-2020 Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume52, Issue5September 2020Pages 459-461 This article also appears in:Health Policy Implications: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 ReferencesRelatedInformation

Older people now currently drink alcohol more frequently than previous generations, indicating a need to understand how this influences health and wellbeing in older adults. However, knowledge and awareness of the changing role alcohol plays in the lives of older people is not necessarily widely understood by allied health professionals in acute hospital contexts. In turn, conversations about drinking alcohol in later life may not be routinely addressed as part of practice, limiting an older person's choice to make informed decisions about their drinking. This paper qualitatively examines when occupational therapists (N = 17) in an acute hospital setting will initiate a conversation with older people (65+ years) about their drinking, guided by a theoretical lens that encompasses both person-centredness and collective occupation. Adopting a qualitative methodology, this study illustrates a typology of reasoning describing how, and in what circumstances, therapists ask older people about their alcohol use. Three themes were generated that provide further insight into the typology, these being 'hesitancy in practice', 'failure to link life transitions to alcohol use' and 'challenges of focusing on healthfulness'. These findings provide a potentially useful tool for therapists, services and organisations to self-assess their approach to asking older people about alcohol use; a necessary element of professional health-care practice as social trends in alcohol use continue to increase.

The International Year of the Nurse and Midwife has not quite played out as we might have imagined. A year of celebrations was anticipated. A much-needed injection of morale boost among the worlds’ nursing population. But then, our celebrations were cut short at dawn, as COVID-19, probably the worst pandemic since the H1N1 influenza in 1918 better known as the Spanish flu, arrived. As a profession, we rallied in response, equipped with our socially constructed caring professionalism and scientific expertise. The faces of many exhausted nurses treating and caring for the sickest people populated our social and traditional media screens. And then, the insidious creep of patient, nurse, and medical professionals’ deaths around the world ‘followed; with the removal of our usual “norms,” uncertainty became the hallmark of our immediate future. On the one hand, this circumstance has amplified the public perception of nurses’ professional relevance to humanity, and on the other hand, COVID-19 has effectively rained on our party—the celebrations for the International Year of the Nurse and Midwife postponed (not that they had really reached the public). Nevertheless, there is time to pause and reflect on the state of nursing in the world in 2020, to ask ourselves how we will successfully propel our discipline forward in and beyond these adverse times, and to consider how we might mitigate our propensity to miss opportunities for taking our profession forward. How will we be ready to capture the public mood of goodwill when the celebratory international year comes around again? We suggest that a feminist standpoint theoretical lens may help us to understand our epistemological advantage to position our profession progressively for the future (Ashton & McKenna, 2020).