ABSTRACT Adherence in digital health studies with extended observation periods (≥ 12 months) is limited, and participant retention considerably reduces with time. The US Food and Drug Administration has issued guidelines for improving participant engagement, adherence, and diversity in digital health studies combined with decentralized procedures. A decentralized digital health study on well‐being was designed with protocolized procedures to study the feasibility of participant engagement and technology support to facilitate adherence (wearing the smartwatch ≥ 70% of time) sustained over a 12‐month period. At the end of the study, participants were asked about their ease of participation and free‐response questions about how wearing the smartwatches impacted their physical wellness. An inductive thematic analysis (ITA) was performed to assess themes of those responses and association with adherence. A total of 298 participants were recruited between 2022 and 2023 ( n = 129 in Cohort A in October 22, n = 169 in Cohort B in April 23), with 23% non‐white participants accrued. Among the 298 participants accrued, 273 (92% of accrued participants) completed the 12‐month study with an average overall adherence of 77.4% (SD = 32.64) wear‐time across 12 months. Median adherence of participants whose responses exemplified an ITA theme encompassing perceived behavior changes in sleep and physical activity was higher than those who did not have a response exemplifying that theme. Conversely, those expressing perceived discomfort or intrusiveness of the smartwatch had a statistically lower adherence. These results highlight the crucial roles of technology support and robust engagement efforts to enable sustained adherence over extended follow‐up periods in decentralized digital health studies.
A practice‐based model to guide nursing science and improve the health and well‐being of patients and caregivers
AbstractAims and ObjectivesThe purpose of this paper is to describe a model to guide nursing science in a clinical practice‐based setting. Exemplars are provided to highlight the application of this nursing research model, which can be applied to other clinical settings that aim to fill evidence gaps in the literature.BackgroundNurse scientists are well positioned to develop new knowledge aimed at identifying global health solutions to multiple disparities. The generation and application of this knowledge are essential to inform and guide professional nursing practice. While a number of evidence‐based practice models exist to guide the integration of literature findings and other sources of evidence into practice, there is a need for additional models that serve as a guide and focus for the conduct of research in distinct scientific areas in practice‐based settings.DesignModel development and description.MethodsMayo Clinic is a large, comprehensive healthcare system with a mission to address unmet patient needs through practice, research and education. PhD‐prepared nurse scientists engage in practice‐based research as an integral component of Mayo Clinic's mission. A practice‐based nursing research model was developed with the intent to advance nursing research in a clinical setting.ResultsThe components of the Mayo Clinic Nursing Research model include symptom science, self‐management science and caregiving science. The generation of nursing science is focused on addressing needs of patients with complex health conditions, inclusive of caregivers.ConclusionsWhile clinical settings provide rich opportunities for the conduct of research, priorities need to be established in which to focus scientific endeavours. The Mayo Clinic Nursing Research model may be applicable to nurses around the globe who are engaged in the generation of knowledge to guide practice.Relevance to Clinical PracticeThe Mayo Clinic Nursing Research model can be used by nurse scientists embedded in healthcare settings to address clinically relevant questions, advance the generation of new nursing knowledge and ultimately improve the health and well‐being of patients and caregivers.
Authentic Connections Groups: A Pilot Test of an Intervention Aimed at Enhancing Resilience Among Nurse Leader Mothers
Abstract Background Nurse leaders who are mothers are at significant risk for experiencing stress, burnout, and occupational fatigue. Authentic Connections (AC) Groups is an intervention shown to be effective for fostering resilience among at‐risk moms, including physicians; however, it has not previously been tested with nurse leaders. Aims Our aims were to test the feasibility and acceptability of the AC Groups intervention with nurse leader mothers and examine its effects on participant resilience, as measured by increased self‐compassion and decreased distress, depression, perceived stress, and burnout. Methods A randomized controlled trial design was employed for this pilot study, with 36 nurse leaders at Mayo Clinic. AC participants attended group sessions for an hour per week for 12 weeks. Control group members were provided 1 hr per week of free time over 12 weeks. Multiple self‐report psychological measures were completed at baseline, post‐intervention, and 3‐month follow‐up. Results The AC Groups intervention was feasible and well‐received by nurse leaders. Session attendance rates averaged 92%. Despite the small n ’s, repeated measures of Analysis of Variance showed significantly greater improvements ( p < .05) for participants in the AC Groups than control condition for depression, self‐compassion, and perceived stress, with large effect sizes ( 0.18–0.22). In addition, effect sizes for anxiety and feeling loved approximated the moderate range ( 0.05 and .07). Linking Evidence to Action The AC intervention shows promise as a feasible intervention for mitigating nurse leader mothers’ stress by positively impacting indices of well‐being, including depression, self‐compassion, and perceived stress. Given, the prevalence of stress and burnout among nurse leaders, the effectiveness of the AC intervention in fostering resilience in this population has significant implications for research and practice. Further research is warranted with larger numbers from multiple sites, longer follow‐up periods, and biomarker measures of stress.