Content validation of the dimensions constituting non-adherence to treatment of arterial hypertension

The objective of the study was to validate the content of the dimensions that constituted nonadherence to treatment of arterial systemic hypertension. It was a methodological study of content validation. Initially an integrative review was conducted that demonstrated four dimensions of nonadherence: person, disease/treatment, health service, and environment. Definitions of these dimensions were evaluated by 17 professionals, who were specialists in the area, including: nurses, pharmacists and physicians. The Content Validity Index was calculated for each dimension (IVCi) and the set of the dimensions (IVCt), and the binomial test was conducted. The results permitted the validation of the dimensions with an IVCt of 0.88, demonstrating reasonable systematic comprehension of the phenomena of nonadherence.

Factors associated with beliefs about adherence to non-pharmacological treatment of patients with heart failure

This study aimed at assessing beliefs about the benefits and barriers to adherence to daily self-monitoring of weight/edema in patients with heart failure, and the influence of demographic and clinical variables on those beliefs. 105 patients were interviewed. The mean of the subscales Benefits and Barriers were 20.2 (± 5.7) and 30.1 (±7.1), respectively. Patients perceived that adherence to daily self-monitoring of weight/edema could keep them healthy, improve their quality of life and decrease the chances of readmission. Approximately half of patients (46.7%) reported forgetting this measure. Those who controlled weight once a month were more likely to have barriers to adherence (OR= 6.6; IC 95% 1.9-13.8; p=0.01), showing this measure to be the main factor related to perceived barriers. Education in health can contribute with the development of strategies aimed at lowering barriers and increasing benefits of this control.

Determinants of emergency contraception non-use among women in unplanned or ambivalent pregnancies

Objective To analyze the determinants of emergency contraception non-use among women in unplanned and ambivalent pregnancies. Method Cross-sectional study with a probabilistic sample of 366 pregnant women from 12 primary health care units in the city of São Paulo, Brazil. A multinomial logistic regression was performed, comparing three groups: women who used emergency contraception to prevent ongoing pregnancies (reference); women who made no use of emergency contraception, but used other contraceptive methods; and women who made no use of any contraceptive methods at all. Results Cohabitation with a partner was the common determinant of emergency contraception non-use. No pregnancy risk awareness, ambivalent pregnancies and no previous use of emergency contraception also contributed to emergency contraception non-use. Conclusion Apart from what is pointed out in the literature, knowledge of emergency contraception and the fertile period were not associated to its use.