翻译：吴竹君 徐医2024级硕士研究生
审校：赵林林 徐医附院麻醉科
周 芳 徐医护理学院
《International Journal of Nursing Studies》2024年11月刊，第159卷
Contents
目录
Research Papers
研究论文
1.Promoting resilience in mental health nurses: A partially clustered randomised controlled trial
促进心理健康护士的复原力：一项部分聚集的随机对照试验
Background
There is a critical global shortage of nurses in mental health, with workforce attrition due in large part to workplace stressors. Proactive strengths-based interventions to strengthen nurses' capacity to manage stress and improve mental health, wellbeing and resilience may also support workforce retention.
全球心理健康护士严重短缺，劳动力流失在很大程度上是由于工作场所的压力源。基于优势的主动干预措施以加强护士管理压力的能力并改善心理健康、幸福和复原力，也可能留住员工。
Objective
To determine the effects of a resilience-building programme on mental health nurses' coping self-efficacy (primary outcome), and psychological distress, wellbeing, resilience, posttraumatic growth, emotional intelligence behaviours, workplace belonging, and turnover intention (secondary outcomes).
确定心理复原力建设项目对心理健康护士应对自我效能感（主要结局）和心理困扰、幸福感、复原力、创伤后成长、情商行为、工作场所归属感和离职意向（次要结局）的影响。
Design
Partially clustered randomised controlled trial.
部分聚集性随机对照试验。
Setting
Large tertiary metropolitan mental health service in Australia.
澳大利亚大型三级大都市心理健康服务。
Participants
A total of 144 registered and enrolled nurses working clinically ≥ 0.6 full-time equivalent (73/intervention, 71/control), with 122 completing 3-month follow-up.
共有 144 名注册和登记护士在临床上工作≥ 0.6 名全职当量（73 名干预组，71 名对照组），其中 122 名护士完成了 3 个月的随访。
Methods
The Promoting Resilience in Nurses programme is an evidence-based workplace intervention delivered by trained facilitators across two workshops. Surveys were administered online upon registration and prior to randomisation (Time 1) into Intervention or Control (no intervention) arms, and immediately after the final workshop (Time 2), and at three months follow-up (Time 3). Linear mixed models for outcome measures were fitted to Time 2 and 3 responses.
促进护士的复原力计划是一项基于证据的工作场所干预，由训练有素的引导者在两个研讨会上提供。调查在注册时和随机化分为干预组或对照组（无干预）组之前（时间 1），在最后一次研讨会后立即（时间 2）和三个月的随访（时间 3）进行在线管理。结果测量的线性混合模型与时间 2 和 3 响应拟合。
Results
There were seven intervention groups, with seven to 13 participants per group. Coping self-efficacy improved at Time 2 (estimated intervention effect 21.2 units, 95 % Confidence Intervals: 13.3 to 29.0) and Time 3 (12.1 units, 4.7 to 19.6), as well as wellbeing (Time 2: 9.2 units, 5.0 to 13.4), resilience (Time 2: 0.24 units, 0.01 to 0.46) and posttraumatic growth (Time 2: 16.1 units, 7.0 to 25.3). Psychological distress reduced (Time 2: − 3.7 units, − 6.2 to − 1.31). All were sustained at three months. Emotional intelligence behaviours were improved (Time 2: 3.5 units, 0.6 to 6.5) but not sustained. Workplace belonging improved at Time 3 (0.34 units, 0.02 to 0.65) only. No statistically significant effects for turnover intention.
有 7 个干预组，每组 7 至 13 名参与者。应对自我效能感在时间 2（估计干预效果 21.2 个单位，95% 置信区间：13.3 至 29.0）和时间 3（12.1 个单位，4.7 至 19.6）以及幸福感（时间 2：9.2 个单位，5.0 至 13.4）、复原力（时间 2：0.24 个单位，0.01 至 0.46）和创伤后成长（时间 2：16.1 个单位，7.0 至 25.3）都得到提高。心理困扰减少（时间 2：− 3.7 个单位，− 6.2 至 − 1.31）。所有患者均维持 3 个月。情商行为得到改善 （时间 2：3.5 个单位，0.6 至 6.5） 但不持续。工作场所归属感仅在时间 3 （0.34 个单位，0.02 至 0.65） 有所改善。对离职意向没有统计学意义的影响。
Conclusions
Despite major contextual challenges, the Promoting Resilience in Nurses programme achieved the aims of promoting nurses' efficacy to cope with stress and regulate their emotions and improving mental health and wellbeing. The findings support the programme as a feasible and successful intervention for nurses across other settings and contexts.
尽管面临重大的环境挑战，但“提升护士的复原力”计划实现了提高护士应对压力和调节情绪的效率以及改善心理健康和幸福的目标。研究结果支持该计划是其他环境和背景下护士的可行且成功的干预措施。
2.The effects of a facilitator-enabled online multicomponent iSupport for dementia programme: A multicentre randomised controlled trial
辅导员支持的在线多组分 iSupport 痴呆计划的效果：一项多中心随机对照试验
3.Effectiveness of the CANCER-AIMS intervention on nutritional status and symptom management in patients with gastric cancer following gastrectomy: A randomized controlled trial
CANCER-AIMS 干预对胃切除术后胃癌患者营养状况和症状管理的有效性：一项随机对照试验
Background
Dietary education and modification interventions are valuable and feasible strategies for enhancing nutritional status and managing symptoms in patients with gastric cancer following gastrectomy. In alignment with administrative policies prioritizing shorter hospital stays and enhanced postoperative self-management, the provision of a simplified nutritional management approach following gastrectomy holds promise for preventing weight loss and expanding resources for monitoring both the nutritional and symptomatic aspects of these patients.
饮食教育和调整干预措施是改善胃切除术后胃癌患者营养状况和管理症状的有价值且可行的策略。与优先缩短住院时间和加强术后自我管理的管理政策一致，胃切除术后提供简化的营养管理方法有望防止体重减轻和扩大监测这些患者的营养和症状方面的资源。
Objective
This study evaluated the effectiveness of an integrative approach involving the five sequential steps of Conversation, Assessment, Nutrition plan, Complications, Evaluation, and Reassurance or Removal (CANCER) into Altering Intake and Managing Symptoms (AIMS), with specific focus on enhancing nutritional status and symptom management.
本研究评估了涉及对话、评估、营养计划、并发症、评估和保证或消除 （CANCER） 五个连续步骤的综合方法的有效性，以改变摄入量和管理症状 （AIMS），特别关注提高营养状况和症状管理。
Design
A single-blind, two-arm, randomized controlled trial.
一项单盲、双臂、随机对照试验。
Setting
This study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Shandong province, China.
这项研究在中国山东省的一家三级医院进行。
Participants
Patients with total or subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
胃癌全胃切除术或次全胃切除术患者。
Methods
The participants were randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group in a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group received a 16-week CANCER-AIMS intervention program. The control group received usual routine care dietary guidance. Questionnaires and electronic medical records of each patient were used to assess dietary intake, dietary symptoms, and subjective and objective nutritional status. Outcomes were assessed at four specific time points: the day before discharge and at 4-, 8-, and 16-weeks following hospital discharge.
参与者以 1：1 的比例被随机分配到干预组或对照组。干预组接受了为期 16 周的 CANCER-AIMS 干预计划。对照组接受常规护理饮食指导。使用每位患者的问卷和电子病历来评估膳食摄入量、饮食症状以及主观和客观营养状况。在 4 个特定时间点评估结局：出院前一天和出院后 4 、 8 和 16 周。
Results
Thirty-eight participants completed the study. The findings revealed significant interaction effects between group and time for dietary intake, dietary symptoms, and nutritional status between intervention and control groups (P < 0.001). The intervention group had significantly higher dietary intake, fewer dietary symptoms, and better nutritional status post-intervention than the control group (P < 0.001). Moreover, there were significant differences in dietary intake, dietary symptoms, and nutritional status according to time in both the intervention and control groups.
38 名参与者完成了这项研究。研究结果显示，干预组和对照组之间饮食摄入、饮食症状和营养状况的组和时间之间存在显着的交互作用 （P < 0.001）。干预组干预后膳食摄入量显著升高，饮食症状较少，营养状况较好 （P < 0.001）。此外，干预组和对照组在饮食摄入量、饮食症状和营养状况方面都随时间存在显著差异。
Conclusion
The CANCER-AIMS intervention for patients with gastric cancer following gastrectomy may be efficient at enhancing nutritional intake, reducing negative dietary symptoms, and thus improving both their subjective and objective nutritional status..
胃切除术后胃癌患者的 CANCER-AIMS 干预可能有效地增加营养摄入，减少负面饮食症状，从而改善他们的主观和客观营养状况。
4.Informing or concealing — Dynamics of telling disease-related bad news among family members of older cancer patients: A qualitative study
告知或隐瞒 — 老年癌症患者家庭成员中讲述疾病相关坏消息的动态：一项定性研究
Reviews and Discussion papers
评论和讨论文件
1.The effectiveness of the comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults with frailty in hospital settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis
医院环境中衰弱老年人的综合老年评估的有效性：系统评价和荟萃分析
2.External validation of the Khorana score for the prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Khorana 评分预测癌症患者静脉血栓栓塞的外部验证：系统评价和荟萃分析
3.Symptom-specific non-pharmacological interventions for behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia: An umbrella review
痴呆行为和心理症状的症状特异性非药物干预：伞式综述
Short Communications
简短的通信
1.Comment on Yu et al. (2024) ‘Effects of interventions to promote resilience in nurses: A systematic review’
评论 Yu et al. （2024） “促进护士复原力的干预措施的效果：系统评价”
2.Authors' response to “Comment on Yu et al. (2024) ‘Effects of interventions to promote resilience in nurses: A systematic review’”
作者对“对 Yu et al. （2024） '干预措施促进护士复原力的影响：系统评价'”的回应
