Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 15 de 15
Filtrar
1.
Nutrients ; 13(7)2021 Jul 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34371932

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There are numerous guidelines developed for bone health. Yet, it is unclear whether the differences in guideline development methods explain the variability in the recommendations for vitamin D and calcium intake. The objective of this systematic review was to collate and compare recommendations for vitamin D and calcium across bone health guidelines, assess the methods used to form the recommendations, and explore which methodological factors were associated with these guideline recommendations. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and other databases indexing guidelines to identify records in English between 2009 and 2019. Guidelines or policy statements on bone health or osteoporosis prevention for generally healthy adults aged ≥40 years were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently extracted recommendations on daily vitamin D and calcium intake, supplement use, serum 25 hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] level, and sunlight exposure; assessed guideline development methods against 25 recommended criteria in the World Health Organization (WHO) handbook for guideline development; and, identified types identified types of evidence underpinning the recommendations. RESULTS: we included 47 eligible guidelines from 733 records: 74% of the guidelines provided vitamin D (200~600-4000 IU/day) and 70% provided calcium (600-1200 mg/day) recommendations, 96% and 88% recommended vitamin D and calcium supplements, respectively, and 70% recommended a specific 25(OH)D concentration. On average, each guideline met 10 (95% CI: 9-12) of the total of 25 methodological criteria for guideline development recommended by the WHO Handbook. There was uncertainty in the association between the methodological criteria and the proportion of guidelines that provided recommendations on daily vitamin D or calcium. Various types of evidence, including previous bone guidelines, nutrient reference reports, systematic reviews, observational studies, and perspectives/editorials were used to underpin the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variability in vitamin D and calcium recommendations and in guideline development methods in bone health guidelines. Effort is required to strengthen the methodological rigor of guideline development and utilize the best available evidence to underpin nutrition recommendations in evidence-based guidelines on bone health.


Assuntos
Remodelação Óssea/efeitos dos fármacos , Osso e Ossos/efeitos dos fármacos , Cálcio/administração & dosagem , Suplementos Nutricionais , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Recomendações Nutricionais , Vitamina D/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Osso e Ossos/fisiopatologia , Cálcio/efeitos adversos , Suplementos Nutricionais/efeitos adversos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/normas , Feminino , Nível de Saúde , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde/normas , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Osteoporose/diagnóstico , Osteoporose/epidemiologia , Osteoporose/fisiopatologia , Osteoporose/prevenção & controle , Vitamina D/efeitos adversos
2.
BMJ Open ; 11(7): e051821, 2021 07 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34272226

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare results reporting and the presence of spin in COVID-19 study preprints with their finalised journal publications. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: International medical literature. PARTICIPANTS: Preprints and final journal publications of 67 interventional and observational studies of COVID-19 treatment or prevention from the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register published between 1 March 2020 and 30 October 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Study characteristics and discrepancies in (1) results reporting (number of outcomes, outcome descriptor, measure, metric, assessment time point, data reported, reported statistical significance of result, type of statistical analysis, subgroup analyses (if any), whether outcome was identified as primary or secondary) and (2) spin (reporting practices that distort the interpretation of results so they are viewed more favourably). RESULTS: Of 67 included studies, 23 (34%) had no discrepancies in results reporting between preprints and journal publications. Fifteen (22%) studies had at least one outcome that was included in the journal publication, but not the preprint; eight (12%) had at least one outcome that was reported in the preprint only. For outcomes that were reported in both preprints and journals, common discrepancies were differences in numerical values and statistical significance, additional statistical tests and subgroup analyses and longer follow-up times for outcome assessment in journal publications.At least one instance of spin occurred in both preprints and journals in 23/67 (34%) studies, the preprint only in 5 (7%), and the journal publications only in 2 (3%). Spin was removed between the preprint and journal publication in 5/67 (7%) studies; but added in 1/67 (1%) study. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 preprints and their subsequent journal publications were largely similar in reporting of study characteristics, outcomes and spin. All COVID-19 studies published as preprints and journal publications should be critically evaluated for discrepancies and spin.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Transversais , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2
3.
BMJ Open ; 10(12): e039036, 2020 12 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33277278

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the association of dairy foods with cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes differs between studies with food industry ties versus those without industry ties. To determine whether studies with or without industry ties differ in their risk of bias. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included cohort and case-control studies that estimated the association of dairy foods with CVD outcomes in healthy adults. INFORMATION SOURCES: We searched eight databases on 1 February 2019 from 2000 to 2019 and hand searched reference lists. RISK OF BIAS: We used the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies-of Exposure tool. INCLUDED STUDIES: 43 studies (3 case-controls, 40 cohorts). SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: There was no clear evidence of an association between studies with industry ties (1/14) versus no industry ties (8/29) and the reporting of favourable results, risk ratio (RR)=0.26 (95% CI 0.04 to 1.87; n=43 studies) and studies with industry ties (4/14) versus no industry ties (11/29) and favourable conclusions, RR=0.75 (95% CI 0.29 to 1.95; n=43). Studies with industry sponsorship, (HR=0.78; n=3 studies) showed a decreased magnitude of risk of CVD outcomes compared with studies with no industry sponsorship (HR=0.97; n=18) (ratio of HRs 0.80 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.97); p=0.03). STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF EVIDENCE: Every study had an overall high risk of bias rating; this was primarily due to confounding. INTERPRETATION: There was no clear evidence of an association between studies with food industry ties and the reporting of favourable results and conclusions compared with studies without industry ties. The statistically significant difference in the magnitude of effects identified in industry-sponsored studies compared with non-industry-sponsored studies, however, is important in quantifying industry influence on studies included in dietary guidelines. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019129659.


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/etiologia , Ingestão de Alimentos , Indústria Alimentícia , Humanos , Viés de Publicação
4.
JBI Evid Synth ; 18(5): 1124-1134, 2020 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32813367

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to describe and map the range of evaluated policies that affect the supply and access of opioids for analgesic therapy. INTRODUCTION: There has been increasing concern regarding the rise in opioid analgesic misuse and related harms, including overdose deaths. In response, policies have been developed and implemented to reduce the burden of opioid-related problems, including strategies that aim to affect the supply and/or access of opioid analgesics. However, little is known about the range and nature of these policies, including whether they have been evaluated for effectiveness and how. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies to be included must evaluate the effectiveness of policies directly designed to affect the supply and/or access of opioids for analgesic therapy, and measure clinical and health services outcomes quantitatively. Studies that assessed interventions or factors impacting the use of these policies, measured only utilization of the policy itself, and/or measured outcomes regarding attitudes and behaviors towards these policies will be excluded. Literature on policies for the treatment and management of opioid abuse, overdose, or addiction will be excluded. METHODS: Multiple databases will be searched including MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science using keywords, indexed terms, and phrases for the following concepts: opioid, policy, evaluation, and clinical context. Each included study will be rated using a modified version of the JBI Levels of Evidence framework. Details on included policies and their assessment will be extracted, and results presented in diagrams and tables.


Assuntos
Overdose de Drogas , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Overdose de Drogas/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Políticas , Literatura de Revisão como Assunto
5.
BMJ Open ; 9(11): e031840, 2019 11 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31699738

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Current recommendations for vitamin D and calcium in dietary guidelines and bone health guidelines vary significantly among countries and professional organisations. It is unknown whether the methods used to develop these recommendations followed a rigourous process and how the differences in methods used may affect the recommended intakes of vitamin D and calcium. The objectives of this study are (1) collate and compare recommendations for vitamin D and calcium across guidelines, (2) appraise methodological quality of the guideline recommendations and (3) identify methodological factors that may affect the recommended intakes for vitamin D and calcium. This study will make a significant contribution to enhancing the methodological rigour in public health guidelines for vitamin D and calcium recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We will conduct a systematic review to evaluate vitamin D and calcium recommendations for osteoporosis prevention in generally healthy middle-aged and older adults. Methodological assessment will be performed for each guideline against those outlined in the 2014 WHO handbook for guideline development. A systematic search strategy will be applied to locate food-based dietary guidelines and bone health guidelines indexed in various electronic databases, guideline repositories and grey literature from 1 January 2009 to 28 February 2019. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise the data on intake recommendation and on proportion of guidelines consistent with the WHO criteria. Logistic regression, if feasible, will be used to assess the relationships between the methodological factors and the recommendation intakes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as we will only extract published data or information from the published guidelines. Results of this review will be disseminated through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019126452.


Assuntos
Cálcio na Dieta/administração & dosagem , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Projetos de Pesquisa , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto , Vitamina D/administração & dosagem , Vitaminas/administração & dosagem , Humanos , Saúde Pública
6.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31592835

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to describe and map the range of evaluated policies that affect the supply and access of opioids for analgesic therapy. INTRODUCTION: There has been increasing concern regarding the rise in opioid analgesic misuse and related harms, including overdose deaths. In response, policies have been developed and implemented to reduce the burden of opioid-related problems, including strategies that aim to affect the supply and/or access of opioid analgesics. However, little is known about the range and nature of these policies, including whether they have been evaluated for effectiveness and how. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies to be included must evaluate the effectiveness of policies directly designed to affect the supply and/or access of opioids for analgesic therapy, and measure clinical and health services outcomes quantitatively. Studies that assessed interventions or factors impacting the use of these policies, measured only utilization of the policy itself, and/or measured outcomes regarding attitudes and behaviors towards these policies will be excluded. Literature on policies for the treatment and management of opioid abuse, overdose or addiction will be excluded. METHODS: Multiple databases will be searched including MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science, using keywords, indexed terms and phrases for the following concepts: opioid, policy, evaluation and clinical context. Each included study will be rated using a modified version of the JBI Levels of Evidence framework. Details on included policies and their assessment will be extracted, and results presented in diagrams and tables.

7.
BMJ Open ; 9(5): e022912, 2019 05 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31110080

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine if observational studies examining the association of wholegrain foods with cardiovascular disease (CVD) with food industry sponsorship and/or authors with conflicts of interest (COI) with the food industry are more likely to have results and/or conclusions that are favourable to industry than those with no industry ties, and to determine whether studies with industry ties differ in their risk of bias compared with studies with no industry ties. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. DATA SOURCES: We searched eight databases from 1997 to 2017 and hand searched the reference lists of included studies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Cohort and case-control studies that quantitatively examined the association of wholegrains or wholegrain foods with CVD outcomes in healthy adults or children. RESULTS: 21 of the 22 studies had a serious or critical risk of bias. Studies with industry ties more often had favourable results compared with those with no industry ties, but the Confidence Interval (CI) was wide, Risk Ratio (RR)=1.44 (95% CI 0.88 to 2.35). The same association was found for study conclusions. We did not find a difference in effect size (magnitude of RRs) between studies with industry ties, RR=0.77 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.01) and studies with no industry ties, RR=0.85 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.00) (p=0.50) I2 0%. These results were comparable for studies that measured the magnitude using Hazard Ratios (HR); industry ties HR=0.82 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.88) versus no industry ties HR=0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.91) (p=0.34) I2 0%. CONCLUSIONS: We did not establish that the presence of food industry sponsorship or authors with a COI with the food industry was associated with results or conclusions that favour industry sponsors. The association of food industry sponsorship or authors with a COI with the food industry and favourable results or conclusions is uncertain. However, our analysis was hindered by the low level of COI disclosure in the included studies. Our findings support international reforms to improve the disclosure and management of COI in nutrition research. Without such disclosures, it will not be possible to determine if the results of nutrition research are free of food industry influences and potential biases. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017055841.


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/dietoterapia , Indústria Alimentícia , Ciências da Nutrição , Grãos Integrais , Doenças Cardiovasculares/mortalidade , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Conflito de Interesses , Humanos , Valor Nutritivo , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto , Viés de Publicação , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto
8.
Int Health ; 11(5): 379-402, 2019 09 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30916303

RESUMO

Medicine and medical device donations have the potential to improve access to healthcare in some of the poorest parts of the world, but can do more harm than good. World Health Organization guidelines advise donors on how to make effective and useful donations. Our objective was to assess compliance of recent medicine or medical device donations with WHO guidelines from 2009 onwards. We searched media, academic and gray literature, including industry and organizational documents, to identify reports describing specific incidences of the donation of medicines or devices. We collected data on donation characteristics and guideline compliance. We identified 88 reports describing 53 donations. Most did not comply with at least some items in WHO guidelines and no reports provided sufficient information to assess compliance against all items. Donations that fail to comply with guidelines may be excessive, expired and/or burden recipient countries with storage and disposal costs. It was estimated that 40-70% of donated medical devices are not used as they are not functional, appropriate, or staff lack training. More effective donations involved needs assessments, training and the use of existing distribution networks. The donation of medicines and medical devices is frequently inadequately reported and at times inappropriate. Guidelines need to be enforced to ensure effective donations.


Assuntos
Equipamentos e Provisões , Doações , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Preparações Farmacêuticas , Equipamentos e Provisões/economia , Guias como Assunto , Humanos , Preparações Farmacêuticas/economia , Organização Mundial da Saúde
9.
F1000Res ; 8: 1760, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32117567

RESUMO

Background: Dietary guidelines should be informed by systematic reviews (SRs) of the available scientific evidence. However, if the SRs that underpin dietary guidelines are flawed in their design, conduct or reporting, the recommendations contained therein may be misleading or harmful. To date there has been little empirical investigation of bias due to selective inclusion of results, and bias due to missing results, in SRs of food/diet-outcome relationships. Objectives: To explore in SRs with meta-analyses of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes: (i) whether systematic reviewers selectively included study effect estimates in meta-analyses when multiple effect estimates were available; (ii) what impact selective inclusion of study effect estimates may have on meta-analytic effects, and; (iii) the risk of bias due to missing results (publication bias and selective non-reporting bias) in meta-analyses. Methods: We will systematically search for SRs with meta-analysis of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes in a generally healthy population, published between January 2018 and June 2019. We will randomly sort titles and abstracts and screen them until we identify 50 eligible SRs. The first reported meta-analysis of a binary or continuous outcome in each SR (the 'index meta-analysis') will be evaluated. We will extract from study reports all study effect estimates that were eligible for inclusion in the index meta-analyses (e.g. from multiple instruments and time points) and will quantify and test for evidence of selective inclusion of results. We will also assess the risk of bias due to missing results in the index meta-analyses using a new tool (ROB-ME). Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval is not required because information will only be extracted from published studies. Dissemination of the results will be through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences. We will make all data collected from this study publicly available via the Open Science Framework.


Assuntos
Publicações , Relatório de Pesquisa , Estado Nutricional , Viés de Publicação , Fatores de Risco
10.
Cancer Nurs ; 42(1): E1-E14, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29461282

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) reduces head and neck cancer (HNC) survival rates and is the most common, severe, and distressing symptom negatively impacting activities of daily living (ADLs) dependence among HNC patients. These patients remain physically inactive after their cancer treatment, although there is consensus that physical activity mitigates CRF in cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: A home-based personalized behavioral physical activity intervention with fitness graded motion exergames (PAfitME) was evaluated for its intervention components, intervention delivery mode, and intervention contact time/duration with initial assessment of the feasibility, acceptability, safety, and outcomes. METHODS: This study (N = 8) was a single-group, pre-post design to evaluate a 6-week PAfitME at the end of HNC treatment. Health outcomes were CRF, ADL dependence, and fitness performance. Behavioral outcomes were exergame adherence. RESULTS: Positive health and behavioral outcomes support the PAfitME protocol including intervention components, intervention delivery mode, and intervention contact times/duration. The PAfitME intervention is feasible and acceptable with promising adherence rates. No adverse events were reported. There was marked improvement in CRF, ADL dependence, cardiorespiratory fitness, balance, muscle strength, and shoulder forward flexion, with large to moderate effect sizes as a result of the PAfitME intervention. CONCLUSION: The PAfitME protocol is ready for additional testing in a randomized clinical trial. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The PAfitME intervention is a nurse-led nonpharmacological intervention. It can be integrated into home care or telehealth care for HNC patients at the end of their cancer treatment once effectiveness is established.


Assuntos
Terapia por Exercício , Fadiga/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/psicologia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/terapia , Serviços de Assistência Domiciliar , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos
11.
Syst Rev ; 7(1): 242, 2018 12 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30577874

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews, which assess the risk of bias in included studies, are increasingly used to develop environmental hazard assessments and public health guidelines. These research areas typically rely on evidence from human observational studies of exposures, yet there are currently no universally accepted standards for assessing risk of bias in such studies. The risk of bias in non-randomised studies of exposures (ROBINS-E) tool has been developed by building upon tools for risk of bias assessment of randomised trials, diagnostic test accuracy studies and observational studies of interventions. This paper reports our experience with the application of the ROBINS-E tool. METHODS: We applied ROBINS-E to 74 exposure studies (60 cohort studies, 14 case-control studies) in 3 areas: environmental risk, dietary exposure and drug harm. All investigators provided written feedback, and we documented verbal discussion of the tool. We inductively and iteratively classified the feedback into 7 themes based on commonalities and differences until all the feedback was accounted for in the themes. We present a description of each theme. RESULTS: We identified practical concerns with the premise that ROBINS-E is a structured comparison of the observational study being rated to the 'ideal' randomised controlled trial. ROBINS-E assesses 7 domains of bias, but relevant questions related to some critical sources of bias, such as exposure and funding source, are not assessed. ROBINS-E fails to discriminate between studies with a single risk of bias or multiple risks of bias. ROBINS-E is severely limited at determining whether confounders will bias study outcomes. The construct of co-exposures was difficult to distinguish from confounders. Applying ROBINS-E was time-consuming and confusing. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience suggests that the ROBINS-E tool does not meet the need for an international standard for evaluating human observational studies for questions of harm relevant to public and environmental health. We propose that a simpler tool, based on empirical evidence of bias, would provide accurate measures of risk of bias and is more likely to meet the needs of the environmental and public health community.


Assuntos
Viés , Exposição Ambiental , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto , Saúde Pública , Saúde Ambiental , Estado Nutricional
12.
Rehabil Res Pract ; 2017: 6843016, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29098087

RESUMO

The challenge of using exergames to promote physical activity among cancer survivors lies in the selection of the exergames that match their fitness level. There is a need for a standardized grading scheme by which to judge an exergame's capacity to address specific physical fitness attributes with different levels of physical engagement. The study aimed to develop an Exergame Grading Scheme and preliminarily evaluate its psychometric properties. Fourteen (14) items were created from the human movement and exergame literature. The content validity index (CVI) was rated by content experts with two consecutive rounds (N = 5 and N = 3 independently). The interrater reliability (IRR) was determined by two raters who used the Exergame Grading Scheme to determine the grading score of the five exergames performed by two cancer survivors (N = 10). Each item had a score of 1 for item-level CVI and 1 for k. For IRR, 9 items had rho values of 1, 1 item had 0.93, and 4 items had between 0.80 and 0.89. This valid and reliable Exergame Grading Scheme makes it possible to develop a personalized physical activity program using any type of exergame or fitness mobile application in rehabilitation practice to meet the needs of cancer survivors.

13.
JAMA Pediatr ; 171(4): 372-381, 2017 04 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28241211

RESUMO

Importance: Medical errors and adverse events (AEs) are common among hospitalized children. While clinician reports are the foundation of operational hospital safety surveillance and a key component of multifaceted research surveillance, patient and family reports are not routinely gathered. We hypothesized that a novel family-reporting mechanism would improve incident detection. Objective: To compare error and AE rates (1) gathered systematically with vs without family reporting, (2) reported by families vs clinicians, and (3) reported by families vs hospital incident reports. Design, Setting, and Participants: We conducted a prospective cohort study including the parents/caregivers of 989 hospitalized patients 17 years and younger (total 3902 patient-days) and their clinicians from December 2014 to July 2015 in 4 US pediatric centers. Clinician abstractors identified potential errors and AEs by reviewing medical records, hospital incident reports, and clinician reports as well as weekly and discharge Family Safety Interviews (FSIs). Two physicians reviewed and independently categorized all incidents, rating severity and preventability (agreement, 68%-90%; κ, 0.50-0.68). Discordant categorizations were reconciled. Rates were generated using Poisson regression estimated via generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures on the same patient. Main Outcomes and Measures: Error and AE rates. Results: Overall, 746 parents/caregivers consented for the study. Of these, 717 completed FSIs. Their median (interquartile range) age was 32.5 (26-40) years; 380 (53.0%) were nonwhite, 566 (78.9%) were female, 603 (84.1%) were English speaking, and 380 (53.0%) had attended college. Of 717 parents/caregivers completing FSIs, 185 (25.8%) reported a total of 255 incidents, which were classified as 132 safety concerns (51.8%), 102 nonsafety-related quality concerns (40.0%), and 21 other concerns (8.2%). These included 22 preventable AEs (8.6%), 17 nonharmful medical errors (6.7%), and 11 nonpreventable AEs (4.3%) on the study unit. In total, 179 errors and 113 AEs were identified from all sources. Family reports included 8 otherwise unidentified AEs, including 7 preventable AEs. Error rates with family reporting (45.9 per 1000 patient-days) were 1.2-fold (95% CI, 1.1-1.2) higher than rates without family reporting (39.7 per 1000 patient-days). Adverse event rates with family reporting (28.7 per 1000 patient-days) were 1.1-fold (95% CI, 1.0-1.2; P = .006) higher than rates without (26.1 per 1000 patient-days). Families and clinicians reported similar rates of errors (10.0 vs 12.8 per 1000 patient-days; relative rate, 0.8; 95% CI, .5-1.2) and AEs (8.5 vs 6.2 per 1000 patient-days; relative rate, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.8-2.2). Family-reported error rates were 5.0-fold (95% CI, 1.9-13.0) higher and AE rates 2.9-fold (95% CI, 1.2-6.7) higher than hospital incident report rates. Conclusions and Relevance: Families provide unique information about hospital safety and should be included in hospital safety surveillance in order to facilitate better design and assessment of interventions to improve safety.


Assuntos
Criança Hospitalizada/estatística & dados numéricos , Hospitais Pediátricos/estatística & dados numéricos , Erros Médicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Criança , Estudos de Coortes , Família , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Prospectivos , Estados Unidos
14.
J Adv Nurs ; 38(3): 303-9, 2002 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-11972671

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Nursing codes of ethics bind nurses to the role of patient advocate and compel them to take action when the rights or safety of a patient are jeopardized. Reporting misconduct is known as whistleblowing and studies indicate that there are personal and professional risks involved in blowing the whistle. AIM: The aim of this study was to explore the beliefs of nurses who wrestled with this ethical dilemma. DESIGN: A descriptive survey design was used to examine the beliefs of nurses in Western Australia who reported misconduct (whistleblowers) and of those who did not report misconduct (nonwhistleblowers). METHODS: The instrument listed statements from current ethical codes, statements from traditional views on nursing and statements of beliefs related to the participant's whistleblowing experience. Respondents were asked to rate each item on a five-point Likert format which ranged from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Data were analysed using a Pearson's correlation matrix and one-way ANOVA. To further explore the data, a factor analysis was run with varimax rotation. RESULTS: Results indicated that whistleblowers supported the beliefs inherent in patient advocacy, while nonwhistleblowers retained a belief in the traditional role of nursing. Participants who reported misconduct (whistleblowers) supported the belief that nurses were primarily responsible to the patient and should protect a patient from incompetent or unethical people. Participants who did not report misconduct (nonwhistleblowers) supported the belief that nurses are obligated to follow a physician's order at all times and that nurses are equally responsible to the patient, the physician and the employer. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that nurses may respond to ethical dilemmas based on different belief systems.


Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Revelação , Ética em Enfermagem , Imperícia , Papel do Profissional de Enfermagem , Enfermeiras e Enfermeiros/psicologia , Defesa do Paciente , Adulto , Análise de Variância , Análise Fatorial , Feminino , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Humanos , Relações Interprofissionais , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Motivação , Pesquisa Metodológica em Enfermagem , Competência Profissional/normas , Apoio Social , Inquéritos e Questionários , Austrália Ocidental
15.
J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv ; 40(1): 14-27, 2002 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-11813350

RESUMO

This research examined the stress-induced health effects of whistleblowing and non-whistleblowing on nurses in Western Australia. A descriptive survey design was used to explore the physical and emotional problems experienced by nurses who did and did not blow the whistle on misconduct in the workplace. A questionnaire based on Lazarus and Folkman's Model of Stress and Coping was developed and posted anonymously to general and mental health nurses. Ninety-five nurses responded to the questionnaire, and 70 were identified as whistleblowers and 25 were identified as non-whistleblowers. Results indicated that 70% of whistleblowers and 64% of non-whistleblowers experienced stress-induced physical problems from being involved in a whistleblowing situation. The most common physical problems experienced by nurses were restless sleep, fatigue, headaches, insomnia, and increased smoking. In addition, 94% of whistleblowers and 92% of non-whistleblowers suffered stress-related emotional problems, the most frequent being anger, anxiety, and disillusionment. Whistleblowers and non-whistleblowers suffered a similar percentage of physical health problems, whereas non-whistleblowers suffered a higher percentage of emotional health problems, especially feelings of guilt, shame, and unworthiness. These findings suggest that whistleblowing situations are stressful and may cause physical and emotional health problems whether one blows the whistle or not.


Assuntos
Sintomas Afetivos/psicologia , Revelação , Papel do Profissional de Enfermagem/psicologia , Doenças Profissionais/psicologia , Transtornos Somatoformes/psicologia , Estresse Psicológico/complicações , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Ética em Enfermagem , Feminino , Humanos , Satisfação no Emprego , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores de Risco , Austrália Ocidental
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...