Impact of a wellness charter on nursing practice for older adults in Tunisian healthcare centers: a cross-sectional quasi-experimental multicenter study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Wellness, a comprehensive approach to patient care, aims to promote freedom, respect and listening to the patient needs in order to prevent abuse. No previous study have assessed the impact of an intervention promoting wellness in older patients within hospital settings. Furthermore, the predictors of key wellness indicators remain unexplored. This gap hinders efforts to target both organizational and individual-level determinants of quality care for older patients. This cross-sectional quasi-experimental multicenter study aimed to assess the effects of introducing a wellness charter intervention on nursing care practices and health outcomes among older patients in Tunisia. METHODS: A before/after study was conducted with a sample of 500 Tunisian nurses. Initially, a self-assessment was carried out using a validated French questionnaire covering eight wellness-related domains (25 items total). This was followed by a communication and awareness campaign explaining the charter, after which the self-assessment was repeated. The domains assessed included: respect for privacy, dignity, and confidentiality (5 items), pain management (2 items), patient/resident comfort (2 items), end-of-life care (3 items), communication (2 items), promotion of patient autonomy (4 items), preservation of personal dignity (3 items), and changes in service organization practices (4 items). To determine factors independently linked to wellness outcomes—specifically, items 21 (discussion of wellness during annual evaluations) and 22 (presence of wellness-related materials in the department)—both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: After the intervention, all eight domains showed statistically significant improvements: changes range from 8% to 46%. Factors significantly associated with the discussion of wellness during annual reviews included: maintaining confidentiality [odds-ratio (OR) = 2.28], avoiding professional discussions at the patient’s bedside [OR = 1.88], supporting end-of-life care and comfort [OR = 2.76], scheduling staff breaks in rotation [OR = 2.33], and monitoring patient call response times [OR = 2.43]. Factors significantly associated with the presence of wellness-related documents in the department included: consistent attention to pain management [OR = 6.73], collecting advance directives [OR = 2.28], encouraging patient mobility [OR = 0.14], rotating staff breaks [OR = 1.61], monitoring call response times [OR = 2.96], and offering flexible visiting hours [OR = 1.51]. CONCLUSION: Emphasizing staff training on patients’ rights and fostering an ethical nurse-patient relationship are crucial to improving wellness in care settings. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".