Place of the Advanced Practice Registered Nurse within the vascular team: a qualitative study of vascular medicine physicians and nurses caring for patients with peripheral artery disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs) treat and diagnose diseases, counsel the public about health problems, manage chronic diseases, and participate in continuing education. In the cardiovascular field, Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD), one of the manifestations of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, is archetypal in combining multiple cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus smoking). Vascular medicine faces the challenge of improving their care and quality of life, but some goals cannot be achieved with all patients. Patients with PAD should benefit from APRN care, but to date there is little published on the place of APRN in vascular medicine worldwide, and none in France. Objective It appeared important to us to assess the perception of their role by physicians and nurses in vascular medicine. As the status of APRN in France has only been enacted by law in 2018, we aim to investigate physicians and nurses working with patients suffering from PAD, to gather their opinions and draw the cooperation outlines these practitioners could have with an APRN. Methods Multicentre exploratory qualitative study by semi-directive interview conducted until data saturation and thematic analysis carried out with healthcare practitioners taking care of patients with PAD: 10 physicians working either in private practice setting or hospital setting or both, and 8 nurses in a vascular unit for hopsitalised patients. Results Three main themes emerged from responders' verbatims: a specific organization of vascular medicine with its inherent challenges, particularly regarding patients with PAD (specific psychosocial profile of patients, lack of therapeutic education, time, knowledge of non-specialist physicians, tedious follow-up outside hospitals, complex care trajectory, and lack of medical-surgical collaboration). Second, a role for APRN, particularly in consultation as part of patient follow-up, with expected benefits for the patient and the care team. The APRN is wanted to fill part of this gap. The expected benefits include a smoother care pathway and increased capacity for cardiovascular education and prevention, especially during consultations. Third, there are certain pitfalls that need to be clarified to integrate these new practitioners into the vascular teams already in place. In particular, the need to inform the vascular medicine teams about this new profession, and the indispensable presence of the conditions necessary for the development of a relationship of trust. Conclusion APRN could be the missing link in a Vascular team by creating a continuum in the care of patients with PAD, ensuring clinical assessment, nursing supervision, adverse event screening, and renewing drug prescriptions with the necessary adjustments, while ensuring an essential part of therapeutic education personalized to each PAD patient. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,024 | 0,035 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,011 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».