Objective:To explore the effectiveness of interprofessional cooperative simulation in teaching emergency care for shock patients among intensive care unit (ICU) undergraduate nursing students.Methods:An interprofessional cooperative simulation-based teaching faculty team was established for ICU undergraduate nursing students, and a shock case library was developed. Using convenience sampling, 32 ICU undergraduate nursing students in 2022 were selected as the control group and received conventional simulation-based teaching, with students rotating through roles as nurses, standardized patients, doctors, and family members. In the experimental group, 34 ICU undergraduate nursing students in 2023 and 24 ICU clinical medicine interns were recruited to act as doctors for interprofessional cooperative simulation-based teaching. Each group was divided into subgroups, with each subgroup consisting of 4-5 nursing students. One group completed simulation-based training per month for a total of 8 sessions, with each session lasting 3 hours. The teaching adopted the on-site "tidal ward" in situ simulation, and the scenarios included patient history collection and health assessment, shock emergency care, nursing evaluation, and health education. The differences between the two groups of nursing students were compared in terms of ICU exit theoretical assessment score, objective structured clinical examination skill assessment score, and satisfaction with simulation-based teaching. SPSS 22.0 was used for independent samples t test and Mann-Whitney U test. Results:The experimental group achieved significantly higher scores in theoretical assessment (84.65±8.06), total score of satisfaction with simulation-based teaching (101.00±5.13), and clinical learning and multiprofessional team dimensions (47.32±3.35) compared to the control group ( P<0.001). The experimental group achieved higher scores in objective structured clinical examination skill assessment (81.40±7.22), guiding feedback and reflection (37.50±3.04), and judgmental thinking and clinical reasoning (16.00±2.03) compared to the control group, though the differences were not significant ( P=0.977, 0.668, and 0.636). Conclusions:Interprofessional cooperative simulation enhances the shock patient emergency care abilities and satisfaction with simulation-based teaching for undergraduate nursing students.

Objective:To explore the effectiveness of interprofessional cooperative simulation in teaching emergency care for shock patients among intensive care unit (ICU) undergraduate nursing students.Methods:An interprofessional cooperative simulation-based teaching faculty team was established for ICU undergraduate nursing students, and a shock case library was developed. Using convenience sampling, 32 ICU undergraduate nursing students in 2022 were selected as the control group and received conventional simulation-based teaching, with students rotating through roles as nurses, standardized patients, doctors, and family members. In the experimental group, 34 ICU undergraduate nursing students in 2023 and 24 ICU clinical medicine interns were recruited to act as doctors for interprofessional cooperative simulation-based teaching. Each group was divided into subgroups, with each subgroup consisting of 4-5 nursing students. One group completed simulation-based training per month for a total of 8 sessions, with each session lasting 3 hours. The teaching adopted the on-site "tidal ward" in situ simulation, and the scenarios included patient history collection and health assessment, shock emergency care, nursing evaluation, and health education. The differences between the two groups of nursing students were compared in terms of ICU exit theoretical assessment score, objective structured clinical examination skill assessment score, and satisfaction with simulation-based teaching. SPSS 22.0 was used for independent samples t test and Mann-Whitney U test. Results:The experimental group achieved significantly higher scores in theoretical assessment (84.65±8.06), total score of satisfaction with simulation-based teaching (101.00±5.13), and clinical learning and multiprofessional team dimensions (47.32±3.35) compared to the control group ( P<0.001). The experimental group achieved higher scores in objective structured clinical examination skill assessment (81.40±7.22), guiding feedback and reflection (37.50±3.04), and judgmental thinking and clinical reasoning (16.00±2.03) compared to the control group, though the differences were not significant ( P=0.977, 0.668, and 0.636). Conclusions:Interprofessional cooperative simulation enhances the shock patient emergency care abilities and satisfaction with simulation-based teaching for undergraduate nursing students.

Objective:To systematically integrate qualitative researches on the financial toxicity experience of cancer patients, so as to provide reference for formulating intervention strategies for financial toxicity in cancer patients.Methods:Qualitative studies on financial toxicity experience of cancer patients were searched in Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, Wanfang data, and China Biology Medicine disc, with a search period from database establishment to August 31, 2023. The quality of the included literature was evaluated using the quality evaluation criteria for qualitative research of the Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence Based Health Care Center in Australia. The aggregation integration method was used to integrate the results.Results:A total of 12 articles were included, and 68 research results were extracted and categorized into 15 new categories. Four integrated results were obtained, including anxiety and stress under financial difficulties, relying on family members to start a new in adversity, and dancing together with treatment and life to write a new article, and great expectations for the future.Conclusions:Pay attention to the financial toxicity of cancer patients, actively seek response strategies, and bring benefits to cancer patients.

Objective:To summarize the best evidence for intermittent pneumatic compression devices in preventing venous thromboembolism for trauma patients.Methods:According to "6S" evidence model, computer evidence retrieval was carried out. Guidelines, clinical decisions, evidence summaries, expert consensuses, and systematic reviews regarding intermittent pneumatic compression in preventing of venous thromboembolism for trauma patients were considered. The retrieval time limit was from the establishment of the database to October 31, 2021. Two researchers independently appraised articles, and extracted data for eligible studies.Results:A total of 21 articles were enrolled, including 13 guidelines, 1 clinical decision, 1 evidence summary, 2 expert consensuses, 4 systematic reviews. Totally 27 items of best evidence were summarized from four aspects: pretherapeutic evaluation, contraindications and applicable conditions, therapeutic strategies, training and education.Conclusions:This study summarized the best evidence of using intermittent pneumatic compression devices to prevent venous thromboembolism for trauma patients, which can provide evidence-based practice bases for nurses to implement scientific and effective standardized management of mechanical thromboprophylaxis. It is necessary to select evidence according to clinical practice and patients ′ wishes, so as to improve the effectiveness of using IPC in preventing thrombosis.