An Aesthetic Factor Priority List of the Female Breast in Scandinavian Subjects.

Background: There is little consensus about the relative determinative value of each individual factor in female breast aesthetics. When performing breast surgery with an aesthetic goal, certain factors will be more important than others. The purpose of this study was to make an aesthetic factor rank list to determine the relative contributions to overall breast aesthetics. Method: Volunteers were scanned using the 3-dimensional Vectra system. Ten Scandinavian plastic surgeons rated 37 subjects, using a validated scoring system with 49 scoring items. The correlation between specific aesthetic factors and overall breast aesthetic scores of the subjects were calculated using Pearson's r, Spearman's ρ, and Kendall's τ. Results: A very strong correlation was found between overall breast aesthetic score and lower pole shape (0.876, P < 0.0001). This was also true for upper pole shape (0.826, P < 0.0001) and breast height (0.821, P < 0.0001). A strong correlation was found between overall breast aesthetic score and nipple position (0.733, P < 0.0001), breast size (0.644, P < 0.0001), and breast width (0.632, P < 0.0001). Factors that were only moderately correlated with aesthetic score were intermammary distance (0.496, P = 0.002), nipple size and projection (0.588, P < 0.0001), areolar diameter (0.484, P < 0.0001), and areolar shape (0.403, P < 0.0001). Perceived symmetry was a weak factor (0.363, P = 0.027). Conclusions: Aesthetic factors of the female breast can be ranked in a priority list. Shape of the lower pole and upper pole and breast height are primary factors of female breast aesthetics. These should be prioritized in any aesthetic breast surgery. Vertical dimensional factors seem to be more determinative than horizontal factors.

Improving the quality of nursing students' clinical placements in nursing homes: an evaluation study.

The aim of this study was to explore students' experiences during their clinical placements in five nursing homes after implementing measures to improve the learning environment. It is vital to stimulate more future nurses to consider a career within geriatric wards and nursing homes. One way to achieve this, is to enhance nursing students' learning experiences during clinical placements in these settings. Measures to improve the learning environment were implemented as a result of a joint effort between a university college and five nursing homes. An explorative design was developed to collect empirical data concerning the students' experiences expressed through questionnaires and logs. The results generally conveyed more positive than negative experiences. Students expressed most satisfaction with peer collaboration, the placement's contribution to awareness of future nursing role and described the learning arena as exciting and interesting. They expressed less satisfaction with supervision from preceptor and how the practice site was prepared for and organized students' placements. Clinical placement arenas and educational institutions should collaborate closely to explore and develop models of supervision appropriate for the nursing home context, to build on existing potentials and resolve the issues that represent barriers for creating interesting and effective learning environments.

Nursing students' perceptions of their clinical learning environment in placements outside traditional hospital settings.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore students' opinions of the learning environment during clinical placement in settings outside traditional hospital settings. BACKGROUND: Clinical placement experiences may influence positively on nursing students attitudes towards the clinical setting in question. Most studies exploring the quality of clinical placements have targeted students' experience in hospital settings. The number of studies exploring students' experiences of the learning environment in healthcare settings outside of the hospital venue does not match the growing importance of such settings in the delivery of health care, nor the growing number of nurses needed in these venues. DESIGN: A survey design was used. METHOD: The Clinical Learning Environment Inventory was administered to two cohorts of undergraduate nursing students (n = 184) after clinical placement in mental health care, home care and nursing home care. RESULTS: Nursing students' overall contentment with the learning environment was quite similar across all three placement areas. Students in mental health care had significantly higher scores on the subscale individualisation, and older students had significantly higher scores on the total scale. Compared with other studies where the Clinical Learning Environment Inventory has been used, the students' total scores in this study are similar or higher than scores in studies including students from hospital settings. CONCLUSION: Results from this study negate the negative views on clinical placements outside the hospital setting, especially those related to placements in nursing homes and mental healthcare settings. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Students' experience of the learning environment during placements in mental health care, home care and nursing homes indicates the relevance of clinical education in settings outside the hospital setting.

Nursing students' perceptions of the clinical learning environment in nursing homes.

Clinical placements are important in the learning processes of nursing students. In Norway, clinical placement in nursing homes is obligatory for nursing students, and this is a demanding and complex setting for learning. This study aimed to assess how first-year nursing students perceived their learning environment in nursing homes and to explore which factors in the clinical learning environment had the greatest influence on students' overall satisfaction with their clinical placement. Students rated their perceptions of the psychosocial learning environment using the Clinical Learning Environment Inventory. Students perceived the learning environment as moderately positive. Mean scores were the highest on the Personalization subscale and the lowest on the Innovation subscale. Students who highly valued Innovation, Involvement, and Personalization had higher scores on the Satisfaction sub-scale. The results of this study indicate that major work is needed to develop the learning context for students in nursing homes.