Protection of human rights of individuals with mental illness is basic to ethical and legal psychiatric care. Nurses play an important role in safeguarding these rights in mental healthcare settings; and this depends largely on the nurses’ knowledge, attitudes, and clinical practices. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of psychiatric nurses regarding the human rights of individuals with mental illness and to examine the relationships among these variables. A quantitative descriptive correlational design was adopted. Data collected from a total of 109 psychiatric nurses working in the inpatient department of a selected psychiatric hospital in Saudi Arabia; through a self-administered questionnaire via Google Forms link. The majority of participants (64%) had good knowledge, while 33% showed moderate knowledge. The mean attitude score was 50.94 ± 6.20, indicating a moderately favorable attitude; however, 70% of nurses demonstrated a neutral attitude. The mean practice score was 24.72 ± 8.28, reflecting a moderate level of rights-based practice, with 33% exhibiting poor practice. A very strong positive correlation found between knowledge and attitude (r = 0.928, p < 0.001) and between knowledge and practice (r = 0.946, p < 0.001) and a moderate positive correlation between attitude and practice (r = 0.506, p < 0.001). This indicates though psychiatric nurses had good knowledge and favorable attitudes toward human rights, practice remains suboptimal. Hence strengthening formal training is essential to bridge the gap between knowledge and practice to promote ethical psychiatric care.

Background: Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) is crucial for providing infants with optimal nutrition for their health, growth, and cognitive development. Maternal self-efficacy plays a significant role in determining the duration of breastfeeding. To promote breastfeeding initiation, duration, and exclusivity, it is important to understand breastfeeding self-efficacy and implement interventions to enhance it. Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions on improving breastfeeding self-efficacy in postpartum women. Method: One-group pretest–posttest was used for this study. The sample consist of 115 postpartum mothers in the postnatal ward recruited from a private hospital Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire composes of two parts: the socio-demographic section and the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF). Data collection technique was conducted through an interview using a questionnaire. Data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23. Results: The study revealed a significant improvement in breastfeeding self-efficacy following the educational intervention (p value<0.001). Participants exhibited increased confidence in breastfeeding techniques and intrapersonal thoughts. All items on the BSES-SF showed statistically significant differences in mean scores between the pre- and post-intervention phases, highlighting the effectiveness of the intervention in enhancing breastfeeding self-efficacy. Conclusion: Postnatal interventional breastfeeding education was significantly associated with an improvement in maternal breastfeeding self-efficacy. Further, it is recommended to provide postpartum women with breastfeeding health education on regular basis to enhance their knowledge and practices regarding complying with breastfeeding.

Background: Accurate interpretation of cardiotocography (CTG) during labor is essential for identifying potential fetal compromise and supporting timely clinical decision-making. The Fresh Eyes approach uses collaborative CTG review by a second clinician as an additional safety process to support interpretation and escalation. Objective: To evaluate sustained compliance with the Fresh Eyes approach to CTG review and describe neonatal outcomes, particularly clinically confirmed hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE), in a Labor and Delivery unit. Methods: A quality improvement study was conducted over 13 months, from July 2024 to July 2025. Eligible CTG records of mothers in active labor at ≥27 weeks' gestation were audited using an approved Fresh Eyes compliance checklist. Monthly compliance with core process indicators and neonatal-outcome capture within the audit was assessed descriptively. Delivery volume and clinically confirmed HIE cases were also monitored. Results: A total of 1,198 CTG records were audited. Compliance with Fresh Eyes review within 1–2 hours, documentation of clinicians' signatures and badge numbers, and documentation in BESTCare remained at 100% throughout the monitoring period. Neonatal outcomes were captured within the audit in 1,068 records (89.1%). Among 1,683 deliveries, five clinically confirmed HIE cases were identified, corresponding to 3.0 cases per 1,000 deliveries. Because Fresh Eyes compliance showed no variability, an association between compliance and HIE occurrence could not be statistically evaluated. Conclusion: The Fresh Eyes approach demonstrated sustained feasibility as a structured collaborative CTG review process. Continued monitoring of interpretation quality, neonatal-outcome capture within the audit, and multidisciplinary review of adverse outcomes is warranted.

Background: Reflective practice is internationally recognised as a foundational mechanism for nursing professional development; however, no validated structural model links Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle to measurable clinical performance, evidence-based practice (EBP) adoption, professional competence, and patient safety outcomes among Saudi Arabian hospital nurses. The Gibbs Reflective Nursing Excellence Model (GRNEM) is proposed to address this gap. Objectives: This review synthesises peer-reviewed evidence (2021–2026) on: (1) the application of Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle among clinical nurses; (2) relationships between reflective practice and clinical performance, EBP, professional competence, and patient safety; and (3) the evidence base supporting GRNEM development and validation in Saudi Arabian hospital settings. Methods: A systematic review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Six databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for studies published between January 2021 and June 2026. Two independent reviewers screened 1,247 records; 24 studies met all inclusion criteria. Quality appraisal was performed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists, with narrative and thematic synthesis. Results: Five overarching themes were identified: Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle as a structured professional development framework; reflective practice and clinical performance; EBP adoption in Saudi Arabian nursing; professional competence and nursing values; and patient safety culture in MNGHA and Saudi hospital settings. Structured reflective practice was consistently associated with improved clinical performance (k=9), EBP adoption (k=7), professional competence (k=5), and patient safety culture (k=3). Conclusion: Findings provide a robust evidence base confirming the theoretical plausibility, contextual relevance, and empirical foundation of GRNEM for Saudi Arabian tertiary hospital nursing, with implications for nursing education, clinical governance, and Saudi Vision 2030 health policy.

Background: Nursing research and scholarly publication underpin evidence-based practice, yet many nurses report barriers that limit their engagement in conducting and disseminating research. Data on these barriers among hospital-based nurses in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province remain limited. Objectives: This study aimed to identify the barriers nurses face in conducting and publishing scientific research at King Abdulaziz Hospital, Al-Ahsa; to assess the impact of these barriers; and to examine their association with nurses' socio-demographic and professional characteristics. Methods: A quantitative, descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted among 127 nursing staff (33.0% response rate from a target population of 385), recruited via convenience sampling. Data were collected using a 45-item structured, self-administered questionnaire adapted from Hakami (2023) and distributed through Microsoft Forms. Thirty-four barrier items were scored on a 4-point scale (strongly disagree = 0, disagree = 0, agree = 1, strongly agree = 2); an overall score ≥ 60% of the maximum was classified as “high barrier.” Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, independent-samples t-tests, and one-way ANOVA were used (α = .05). Results: Respondents were predominantly female (90.6%) and non-Saudi (85.8%), with a mean age of 40.9 years (SD = 9.3). The most highly endorsed barriers were limited training courses on publishing (85.0% agreement), insufficient time to conduct research (82.7%), high cost of publication (83.5%), and lack of clarity around journal guidelines (89.8%). Only 10 respondents (7.9%) met the high-barrier threshold overall; mean total barrier score was 25.6 (SD = 12.9) of 68 (37.7% of maximum). No demographic variable was significantly associated with the high/low barrier classification, although age group was significantly associated with the continuous barrier score, F(3, 123) = 3.80, p = .012, with nurses younger than 30 years reporting the highest scores. Conclusion: Structural and institutional barriers — particularly insufficient training, time, and financial support — are more salient than personal writing or language barriers among this nursing population. Targeted institutional interventions, especially for early-career nurses, are recommended to strengthen nursing research capacity.