Adding injury to insult: Unfair treatment at work and occupational injury among hospital patient-care workers.

BACKGROUND: Hospital patient-care workers have high occupational injury rates. While physical hazards within hospital work environments are established determinants of injury, social exposures may also contribute. This study examined how reports of unfair treatment at work, a dimension of work-related experiences of discrimination, were associated with injury among hospital-based patient-care workers. METHODS: We used data from the Boston Hospital Workers Health Study, a longitudinal cohort of nurses and nursing assistants at two Boston-area hospitals. In 2018, we conducted a worker survey asking about three types of unfair treatment at work and occupational injuries during the past year. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models to evaluate associations between specific types, total load, and high-frequency exposure of unfair treatment with injury, adjusting for age, gender, race and ethnicity, job title, and unit type. RESULTS: Among 1001 respondents, 21% reported being humiliated in front of others at work, 28% reported being watched more closely than other workers, and 47% reported having to work twice as hard as others for the same treatment. For each type of unfair treatment, we observed a monotonic relationship with occupational injury wherein increasing frequency of exposure was associated with increased odds of injury. We also observed monotonic relationships between total load and high-frequency exposure to unfair treatment and odds of injury. CONCLUSIONS: Work-related unfair treatment is associated with injury among hospital workers. Programs and policies that focus on preventing unfair treatment may lessen injury burden in hospital workers.

Development and Psychometric Properties of the Sleep Parenting Scale for Infants.

Although infants' sleep behaviors are shaped by their interactions with parents at bedtime, few tools exist to capture parents' sleep parenting practices. This study developed a Sleep Parenting Scale for Infants (SPS-I) and aimed to (1) explore and validate its factorial structure, (2) examine its measurement invariance across mothers and fathers, and (3) investigate its reliability and concurrent and convergent validity. SPS-I was developed via a combination of items modified from existing scales and the development of novel items. Participants included 188 mothers and 152 mother-father dyads resulting in 340 mothers and 152 fathers; about half were non-Hispanic white. Mothers and fathers completed a 14-item SPS-I for their 12-month-old infant. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to explore and validate SPS-I's underlying structure. Multigroup CFA was used to examine measurement invariance across mothers and fathers. Reliability was examined using Cronbach's alpha. Concurrent validity was assessed using linear regressions examining associations between SPS-I factors and parent-reported infants nighttime sleep duration. Convergent validity was assessed using paired-sample t-tests to test whether the SPS-I subscale scores were similar between mothers and fathers in the same household. EFA and CFA confirmed a 3-factor, 12-item model: sleep routines, sleep autonomy, and screen media in the sleep environment. SPS-I was invariant across mothers and fathers and was reliable. Concurrent and convergent validity were established. SPS-I has good psychometric properties, supporting its use for characterizing sleep routines, sleep autonomy, and screen media in the sleep environment by mothers and fathers.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.2021.2002799 .

The associations between resilience and socio-demographic factors in parents who care for their children with congenital heart disease.

Objective: To examine the resilience of parents of children with congenital heart disease and to investigate socio-demographic factors that may influence parents' resilience. Methods: This is a web-based survey study using a cross-sectional design. A purposive sampling method was utilized to recruit 515 parents who care for children with congenital heart disease. Resilience was assessed using the Dispositional Resilience Scale-Ⅱ. Based on expert-interviews, a questionnaire was designed to collect socio-demographic data. Descriptive statistics, factor analysis, and linear regressions were used to analyze data. Results: A total of 413 parents completed the survey study. The mean resilience score was 3.75 (SD = 0.61; range = 1.89-4.89) with higher scores indicating higher resilience. The linear regression models demonstrated that parents who had lower education levels and lower gross household income had lower resilience (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Parents reported resilience that reflected their ability to cope with stressful events and mitigate stressors associated with having and caring for children with congenital heart disease. Lower education levels and lower gross household income are associated with lower resilience. To increase parents' resilience, nursing practice and nurse-led interventions should target screening and providing support for parents at-risk for lower resilience. As lower education level and financial hardship are factors that are difficult to modify through personal efforts, charitable foundations, federal and state governments should consider programs that would provide financial and health literacy support for parents at-risk for lower resilience.

Co-occurring Fatigue and Lymphatic Pain Incrementally Aggravate Their Negative Effects on Activities of Daily Living, Emotional Distress, and Overall Health of Breast Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue and lymphatic pain are the most common and debilitating long-term adverse effects of breast cancer treatment. Fatigue and pain independently have negative effects on quality of life, physical functions, and cancer recurrence-free survival. The interactions between fatigue and pain may aggravate their negative effects. OBJECTIVES: Examine the effects of co-occurring fatigue and lymphatic pain on activities of daily living (ADLs), emotional distress, and overall health of breast cancer patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional and observational design was used to enroll 354 breast cancer patients. Valid and reliable instruments were used to assess fatigue, lymphatic pain, ADLs, emotional distress, and overall health. Descriptive statistics and multivariable regression models were used for data analysis. RESULTS: After controlling for demographic and clinical factors, patients with co-occurring fatigue and lymphatic pain had higher odds of having impaired ADLs (OR = 24.43, CI = [5.44-109.67], P < .001) and emotional distress (OR = 26.52, CI = [9.64-72.90], P < .001) compared to patients with only fatigue and only lymphatic pain. Patients with co-occurring fatigue and lymphatic pain had 179% increase in impaired ADL scores (B = 8.06, CI = [5.54-10.59]) and 211% increase in emotional distress scores (B = 9.17, CI = [5.52-12.83]) compared to those without co-occurring fatigue and lymphatic pain. Patients with co-occurring fatigue and lymphatic pain had a 34% decrease (B = -26.29, CI = [-31.90 to -20.69]) and patients with only fatigue had a 33% decrease in overall health scores (B = -25.74, 95% CI = [-34.14 to -17.33]), indicating poor overall health. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue and lymphatic pain affected 66.4% of breast cancer patients. Findings from this study suggest that co-occurring fatigue and lymphatic pain have negative effects on breast cancer patients' ADLs, emotional distress, and overall health. The synergistic interactions between fatigue and lymphatic pain incrementally aggravated their negative effects on ADLs and emotional distress. Findings of the study highlight the need to evaluate the underlying mechanisms for co-occurring fatigue and lymphatic pain and develop interventions that target both fatigue and lymphatic pain to improve breast cancer patients' the quality of life.

A Web- and Mobile-Based Intervention for Women Treated for Breast Cancer to Manage Chronic Pain and Symptoms Related to Lymphedema: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The-Optimal-Lymph-Flow (TOLF) is a patient-centered, web- and mobile-based mHealth system that delivers safe, easy, and feasible digital therapy of lymphatic exercises and limb mobility exercises. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to evaluate the effectiveness of the web- and mobile-based TOLF system for managing chronic pain and symptoms related to lymphedema. The primary outcome includes pain reduction, and the secondary outcomes focus on symptom relief, limb volume difference measured by infrared perometer, BMI, and quality of life (QOL) related to pain. We hypothesized that participants in the intervention group would have improved pain and symptom experiences, limb volume difference, BMI, and QOL. METHODS: A parallel RCT with a control-experimental, pre- and posttest, and repeated-measures design were used. A total of 120 patients were recruited face-to-face at the point of care during clinical visits. Patients were randomized according to pain in a 1:1 ratio into either the arm precaution (AP) control group to improve limb mobility and arm protection or The-Optimal-Lymph flow (TOLF) intervention group to promote lymph flow and limb mobility. Trial outcomes were evaluated at baseline and at week 12 after the intervention. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, t test, and generalized linear mixed effects models were performed for data analysis. RESULTS: At the study endpoint of 12 weeks, significantly fewer patients in the TOLF intervention group compared with the AP control group reported chronic pain (45% [27/60] vs 70% [42/60]; odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.90; P=.02). Patients who received the TOLF intervention were significantly more likely to achieve a complete reduction in pain (50% [23/46] vs 22% [11/51]; OR 3.56, 95% CI 1.39-9.76; P=.005) and soreness (43% [21/49] vs 22% [11/51]; OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.03-6.81; P=.03). Significantly lower median severity scores were found in the TOLF group for chronic pain (MedTOLF=0, IQR 0-1 vs MedAP=1, IQR 0-2; P=.02) and general bodily pain (MedTOLF=1, IQR=0-1.5 vs MedAP=1, IQR 1-3; P=.04). Compared with the AP control group, significantly fewer patients in the TOLF group reported arm/hand swelling (P=.04), heaviness (P=.03), redness (P=.03), and limited movement in shoulder (P=.02) and arm (P=.03). No significant differences between the TOLF and AP groups were found in complete reduction of aching (P=.12) and tenderness (P=.65), mean numbers of lymphedema symptom reported (P=.11), ≥5% limb volume differences (P=.48), and BMI (P=.12). CONCLUSIONS: The TOLF intervention had significant benefits for breast cancer survivors to manage chronic pain, soreness, general bodily pain, arm/hand swelling, heaviness, and impaired limb mobility. The intervention resulted in a 13% reduction (from 40% [24/60] to 27% [16/60]) in proportions of patients who took pain medications compared with the AP control group, which had a 5% increase (from 40% [24/60] to 45% [27/60]). A 12% reduction (from 27% [16/60] to 15% [9/60]) in proportions of patients with ≥5% limb volume differences was found in the TOLF intervention, while a 5% increase in the AP control group (from 40% [24/60] to 45% [27/60]) was found. In conclusion, the TOLF intervention can be a better choice for breast cancer survivors to reduce chronic pain and limb volume. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02462226; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02462226. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/resprot.5104.

Lymphatic Pain in Breast Cancer Survivors.

Background: Breast cancer survivors who report chronic pain in the affected ipsilateral upper limb or body are nearly twice as likely to develop lymphedema. Little is known about lymphatic pain, defined as co-occurring pain and swelling in the affected ipsilateral upper limb or body. The study aimed to examine the predictors and effects of lymphatic pain on breast cancer survivors' activities of daily living (ADLs). Materials and Methods: A sample of 568 patients was recruited in a metropolitan cancer center in the United States. Demographic and clinical data were collected. Body mass index (BMI) and limb volume were measured using infra-red perometer. Lymphatic pain and ADLs were measured by the Lymphedema and Breast Cancer Symptom Experience Index. Parametric and nonparametric tests and generalized linear models were used to analyze data. Results: Lymphatic pain affected 33% of survivors. Significant predictors of lymphatic pain included younger age, higher BMI, financial hardship, and a diagnosis of lymphedema. Patients with a diagnosis of lymphedema had 9.68 odds (confidence interval [CI]: 5.78-16.63; p < 0.001) and those with financial hardship had 4.64 odds (CI: 1.99-11.32; p = 0.001) of experiencing lymphatic pain. Patients with lymphatic pain had more impairments in ADLs (p < 0.001) compared to patients with only pain, only swelling, and no symptoms. Significantly more patients with lymphatic pain had a limb volume difference of >5% and >10% compared to patients with only pain and no symptom. Conclusion: This study is the first to report that in a large sample of patients, 33.1% experienced lymphatic pain and that lymphatic pain was associated with significant impairments in ADLs. Findings suggest that lymphatic pain may be due to abnormal accumulation of lymph fluid. Research is needed to ascertain the physiological mechanisms that underlie lymphatic pain and determine whether strategies to prevent and treat lymphedema can decrease lymphatic pain.

The Effects of Obesity on Lymphatic Pain and Swelling in Breast Cancer Patients.

Lymphatic pain and swelling due to lymph fluid accumulation are the most common and debilitating long-term adverse effects of cancer treatment. This study aimed to quantify the effects of obesity on lymphatic pain, arm, and truncal swelling. Methods: A sample of 554 breast cancer patients were enrolled in the study. Body mass index (BMI), body fat percentage, and body fat mass were measured using a bioimpedance device. Obesity was defined as a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2. The Breast Cancer and Lymphedema Symptom Experience Index was used to measure lymphatic pain, arm, and truncal swelling. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) to quantify the effects of obesity. Results: Controlling for clinical and demographic characteristics as well as body fat percentage, obesity had the greatest effects on lymphatic pain (OR 3.49, 95% CI 1.87-6.50; p < 0.001) and arm swelling (OR 3.98, 95% CI 1.82-4.43; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Obesity is a significant risk factor for lymphatic pain and arm swelling in breast cancer patients. Obesity, lymphatic pain, and swelling are inflammatory conditions. Future study should explore the inflammatory pathways and understand the molecular mechanisms to find a cure.

The Effects of Kinect-Enhanced Lymphatic Exercise Intervention on Lymphatic Pain, Swelling, and Lymph Fluid Level.

BACKGROUND: The-Optimal-Lymph-Flow (TOLF) intervention aims to promote lymph flow through therapeutic lymphatic exercises to relieve lymphatic pain, swelling, lymphedema symptoms, and to decrease lymph fluid levels among breast cancer survivors. To enhance the efficacy of the TOLF intervention, an innovative, intelligent, Kinect-enhanced lymphatic exercise intervention (Kinect-TOLF) was developed to teach patients to perform the lymphatic exercises correctly. OBJECTIVES: This feasibility trial aimed to determine the feasibility, usability, and effects of the Kinect-TOLF on lymphatic pain, swelling, lymphedema symptoms, and lymph fluid levels. METHODS: A single-arm feasibility trial with a pre- and post-test design was employed to recruit 30 breast cancer survivors with persistent lymphatic pain or swelling. Patients received a single training session to learn how to perform the lymphatic exercises using the Kinect-TOLF program. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, t-test, Spearman's rank correlation coefficients, linear regressions, and Cohen's d were performed for data analysis. Qualitative data were assessed for common themes. RESULTS: The Kinect-TOLF was effective in training patients to perform the lymphatic exercises correctly with high user satisfaction. Significant reductions were found in scores of lymphatic pain (MedΔ = -1.00, CI = [-1.5, -0.1], P = .004), arm/hand swelling (MedΔ = -1.00, CI = [-1.5, -0.5], P = .004), total swelling (MedΔ = -1.5, CI = [-2.0, -1.0], P = .003), number of lymphedema symptoms (MΔ = -3.8, CI = [-5.5, -2.1], P < .001), and lymphedema symptom severity (MΔ = -5.3, CI = [-9.5, -1.1], P = .016). A significant reduction in lymph fluid levels was found in mean L-Dex scores (MΔ = -2.68, CI = [-4.67, -0.69], P = .010). Greater decrease in mean L-Dex scores were found in patients with abnormal lymph fluid levels (L-Dex ≥ 7.1) (MΔ = -5.19, CI = [-1.75, -8.63], P = .008). Patients' qualitative feedback supported the results of the study. CONCLUSIONS: The Kinect-TOLF is safe, feasible, and effective in reducing lymphatic pain, swelling, lymphedema symptoms, and in decreasing lymph fluid levels. Future research should focus on a randomized clinical trial to confirm the unique or synergistic efficacy of the Kinect-TOLF in comparison with current lymphedema treatment and other forms of exercises or movement therapy. This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov with US ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03999177.