51 resultados para patient health questionnaire
Resumo:
Speaking up about patient safety is vital to avoid errors reaching the patient and to improve a culture of safety. This study investigated the prevalence of non-speaking up despite concerns for safety and aimed to identify predictors for withholding voice among healthcare professionals (HCPs) in oncology. A self-administered questionnaire assessed safety concerns, speaking up beliefs and behaviours among nurses and doctors from nine oncology departments. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify predictors for withholding safety concerns. A total of 1013 HCPs returned the completed survey (response rate 65%). Safety concerns were common among responders. Fifty-four per cent reported to recognise their colleagues making potentially harmful errors at least sometimes. A majority of responders reported at least some episodes of withholding concerns about patient safety. Thirty-seven per cent said they remained silent at least once when they had information that might have helped prevent an incident. Respondents believed that a high level of interpersonal, communication and coping skills are necessary to speak up about patient safety issues at their workplace. Higher levels of perceived advocacy for patient safety and psychological safety significantly decreased the frequency of withholding voice. Remaining silent about safety concerns is a common phenomenon in oncology. Improved strategies are needed to support staff in effective communication and make cancer care safer.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE The aim of the present prospective clinical study was to compare patient-reported outcomes for maxillary conventional dentures and maxillary implant-supported dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS Twenty-one patients (6 women and 15 men) being edentulous in the maxilla and encountering problems with their existing dentures were included. Twelve patients (4 women and 8 men) received a new set of conventional dentures, due to insufficient dentures. In nine patients (2 women and 7 men), the existing dentures were adjusted by means of relining or rebasing. All patients received implant-supported dentures on two retentive anchors. In total, 42 implants were inserted in the anterior maxilla. The participants rated their satisfaction on their existing conventional dentures, 2 months after insertion of new conventional dentures and 2 months after insertion of implant-supported dentures. Thereby, patients responded to questionnaires capturing the oral health impact profile (OHIP) using visual analog scales. Seven domains (functional limitation, physical pain, psychological discomfort, physical, psychological and social disability and handicap) were assessed. Higher scores implied poorer patient satisfaction. In addition, the questionnaire involved the evaluation of cleaning ability, general satisfaction, speech, comfort, esthetics, stability, and chewing ability. Higher scores implied higher patient satisfaction. RESULTS Patient satisfaction significantly increased for implant-supported dentures compared with old dentures in all seven OHIP subgroups, as well as for cleaning ability, general satisfaction, ability to speak, comfort, esthetics, and stability (P < 0.05). The comparison of new conventional dentures and implant-supported dentures revealed a statistically significantly increased satisfaction for functional limitation (difference of 33.2 mm), psychological discomfort (difference of 36.7 mm), physical disability (difference of 36.3 mm), and social disability (difference of 23.5 mm), (P < 0.05). Additionally, general satisfaction, chewing ability, speech, and stability significantly improved in implant-supported dentures (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Within the limits of this study, maxillary dentures retained by two implants provided some significant short-term improvements over conventional dentures in oral- and health-related quality of life.
Resumo:
Hintergrund: Wegen sich verändernder Strukturen im Spitalbereich sowie im Bereich der Hausarztabdeckung als auch infolge zunehmenden Drucks auf das Gesundheitssystem kommen mehr Patienten auf die Notfallstationen, die aufgrund ihrer Grunderkrankung und des fortgeschrittenen Krankheitsstadiums von einem palliativen Behandlungskonzept profitieren. Eine wesentliche Herausforderung ist hierbei bereits die Definition von «Palliative Care» (PC), sowie die Klärung, was genau die palliative Versorgung beinhaltet. Häufig vermischt wird der Terminus «Palliative Care» mit «End of life care». Die vorliegende Studie ist eine Standortbestimmung im Universitären Notfallzentrum des Inselspitals Bern (UNZ), das jährlich rund 32 400 Patienten versorgt. Ziel ist es, mehr über den Wissensstand und die persönliche Einstellung der Mitarbeiter zu palliativen Fragestellungen und speziell zum Begriff «Palliative Care» zu erhalten. Methodik: Die Mitarbeiter des Universitären Notfallzentrums des Inselspitals Bern (UNZ) wurden mittels einer Online-Umfrage durch eine spitalexterne Fachinstitution interviewt. Diese Befragung basiert auf einem Instrument [1], das in einer vergleichbaren Studie auf einer Notfallstation in den USA entwickelt und validiert wurde. Resultate: Von 154 Mitarbeitenden (Pflege und Ärzte) füllten 60 Mitarbeitende die Befragung vollständig aus, entsprechend einer Antwortrate von 39%. Die Definition von Palliative Care (von n=60) war sehr heterogen und konnte in sechs Themenbereiche eingeteilt werden. Bei den Fragen nach spezifischen Leistungsangeboten äusserten die Mitarbeitenden den Wunsch nach einem erleichterten Zugang zu bestehenden Patientendaten, nach einem 24-Stunden-Palliative-Care-Konsiliardienst und nach mehr Besprechungszeit für Fragestellungen der PC im klinischen Alltag. Schlussfolgerungen: Die heterogene Begriffsdefinition von «Palliative Care» bestätigt sich. Es besteht kein klares Vorgehen, und zudem lässt sich ein Zeitmangel für ausführliche Patientengespräche in palliativen Situationen im UNZ feststellen. Der Patientenwunsch oder Patientenverfügungen mit DNR/DNI-Prozedere stehen nicht im Widerspruch zu den persönlichen Wertvorstellungen der meisten Mitarbeitenden. Die 24-Stunden-Verfügbarkeit eines spezialisierten PC-Teams, das Erarbeiten von Guidelines und vermehrtes Training für PC würde von den UNZ-Mitarbeitenden begrüsst.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION Optimal identification of subtle cognitive impairment in the primary care setting requires a very brief tool combining (a) patients' subjective impairments, (b) cognitive testing, and (c) information from informants. The present study developed a new, very quick and easily administered case-finding tool combining these assessments ('BrainCheck') and tested the feasibility and validity of this instrument in two independent studies. METHODS We developed a case-finding tool comprised of patient-directed (a) questions about memory and depression and (b) clock drawing, and (c) the informant-directed 7-item version of the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE). Feasibility study: 52 general practitioners rated the feasibility and acceptance of the patient-directed tool. Validation study: An independent group of 288 Memory Clinic patients (mean ± SD age = 76.6 ± 7.9, education = 12.0 ± 2.6; 53.8% female) with diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment (n = 80), probable Alzheimer's disease (n = 185), or major depression (n = 23) and 126 demographically matched, cognitively healthy volunteer participants (age = 75.2 ± 8.8, education = 12.5 ± 2.7; 40% female) partook. All patient and healthy control participants were administered the patient-directed tool, and informants of 113 patient and 70 healthy control participants completed the very short IQCODE. RESULTS Feasibility study: General practitioners rated the patient-directed tool as highly feasible and acceptable. Validation study: A Classification and Regression Tree analysis generated an algorithm to categorize patient-directed data which resulted in a correct classification rate (CCR) of 81.2% (sensitivity = 83.0%, specificity = 79.4%). Critically, the CCR of the combined patient- and informant-directed instruments (BrainCheck) reached nearly 90% (that is 89.4%; sensitivity = 97.4%, specificity = 81.6%). CONCLUSION A new and very brief instrument for general practitioners, 'BrainCheck', combined three sources of information deemed critical for effective case-finding (that is, patients' subject impairments, cognitive testing, informant information) and resulted in a nearly 90% CCR. Thus, it provides a very efficient and valid tool to aid general practitioners in deciding whether patients with suspected cognitive impairments should be further evaluated or not ('watchful waiting').
Resumo:
STUDY QUESTION: What is the effect of the minimally invasive surgical treatment of endometriosis on health and on quality of work life (e.g. working performance) of affected women? SUMMARY ANSWER: Absence from work, performance loss and the general negative impact of endometriosis on the job are reduced significantly by the laparoscopic surgery. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The benefits of surgery overall and of the laparoscopic method in particular for treating endometriosis have been described before. However, previous studies focus on medical benchmarks without including the patient's perspective in a quantitative manner. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A retrospective questionnaire-based survey covering 211 women with endometriosis and a history of specific laparoscopic surgery in a Swiss university hospital, tertiary care center. Data were returned anonymously and were collected from the beginning of 2012 until March 2013. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women diagnosed with endometriosis and with at least one specific laparoscopic surgery in the past were enrolled in the study. The study investigated the effect of the minimally invasive surgery on health and on quality of work life of affected women. Questions used were obtained from the World Endometriosis Research Foundation (WERF) Global Study on Women's Health (GSWH) instrument. The questionnaire was shortened and adapted for the purpose of the present study. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the 587 women invited to participate in the study, 232 (232/587 = 40%) returned the questionnaires. Twenty-one questionnaires were excluded due to incomplete data and 211 sets (211/587 = 36%) were included in the study. Our data show that 62% (n = 130) of the study population declared endometriosis as influencing the job during the period prior to surgery, compared with 28% after surgery (P < 0.001). The mean (maximal) absence from work due to endometriosis was reduced from 2.0 (4.9) to 0.5 (1.4) hours per week (P < 0.001). The mean (maximal) loss in working performance after the surgery averaged out at 5.7% (12.6%) compared with 17.5% (30.5%) before this treatment (P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The mediocre response rate of the study weakens the representativeness of the investigated population. Considering the anonymous setting a non-responder investigation was not performed. A bias due to selection, information and negativity effects within a retrospective survey cannot be excluded, although study-sensitive questions were provided in multiple ways. The absence of a control group (sham group; e.g. patients undergoing specific diagnostic laparoscopy without treatment) is a further limitation of the study. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our study shows that indicated minimally invasive surgery has a clear positive effect on the wellbeing and working performance of women suffering from moderate to severe endometriosis. Furthermore, national net savings in indirect costs with the present number of surgeries is estimated to be €10.7 million per year. In an idealized setting (i.e. without any diagnosis delay) this figure could be more than doubled. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was performed on behalf of the University Hospital of Bern (Inselspital) as one of the leading Swiss tertiary care centers. The authors do not declare any competing interests.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Only a minority of people suffering from depression receive adequate treatment. Psychological Online Interventions (POIs) could help bridge existing treatment gaps and augment the effectiveness of current treatments. Apart from effectiveness, user acceptance of POIs must be achieved if such interventions are to be broadly implemented in existing health-care. Valid measurement tools examining attitudes towards POIs are lacking. Therefore, we examined the dimensionality of attitudes towards POIs, developed a novel questionnaire, the Attitudes towards Psychological Online Interventions Questionnaire (APOI), and gathered data to examine its reliability. METHODS: We recruited a sample of 1004 adults with mild to moderate depressive symptoms from a range of sources. We constructed a set of 35 items based on literature review as well as expert and patient queries. The initial items were subjected to an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) in a randomly selected subsample. A final set of 16 items was subjected to a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to cross-validate the factor structure in a separate subsample. RESULTS: The EFA revealed four dimensions: "Scepticism and Perception of Risks", "Confidence in Effectiveness", "Technologization Threat" and "Anonymity Benefits". The model fit in the CFA was excellent relating to all applied indices (χ(2)=105.816, p=.651; SRMR=.042; RMSEA=.013; CFI=.994) and the APOI total scale showed acceptable to good internal consistency. CONCLUSIONS: Further research with the APOI might facilitate the development and dissemination of POIs and, ultimately, help improve the quality of care for people experiencing depressive symptoms.