Self-efficacy, mindfulness, and perceived social support as resources to maintain the mental health of students in Switzerland's universities of applied sciences: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Switzerland's student population is at a particularly high risk of developing mental health disorders, creating a major challenge for Switzerland's higher education establishments. Research to date has primarily sought to identify the risk factors affecting students' mental health; however, their exposure to these factors is often unavoidable. Thus, the present study adopted a salutogenic approach focussing on the determinants of health. We examined the mental health resources available to students reported in the literature as being susceptible to helping them maintain good mental health despite their exposure to risk factors. METHODS: In February 2020, 2,415 first- and second-year bachelor's degree students in applied sciences in French-speaking Switzerland completed an online questionnaire. The variables measured were self-evaluated mental health, perceived stress and three potential health resources: students' feelings of self-efficacy, their capacity for mindfulness and their social support. The results were analysed using hierarchical linear regression models. RESULTS: When all the variables were included in the model without interaction effect, our results revealed that students' self-evaluated mental health was negatively associated with perceived stress (ß = -0.43, p < 0.001) and positively associated with the three potential health resources (self-efficacy: ß = 0.26, p < 0.001; mindfulness: ß = 0.10, p < 0.001; social support: ß = 0.17, p < 0.001). An analysis of the interaction effects also revealed that a high level of self-efficacy was associated with perceived stress being less strongly linked to mental health (ß = 0.29, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that self-efficacy, mindfulness, and perceived social support are valuable resources for protecting students' mental health. Thus, implementing interventions aimed at reinforcing them, could support students in applied sciences all along their academic pathway, in their classes and during their professional work experience placements.

Patient's learning needs and self-efficacy level after percutaneous coronary intervention: A descriptive study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Identify and compare learning needs, levels of self-efficacy and their association among inpatients and outpatients of a cardiac care unit with coronary heart disease who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a Swiss university hospital. BACKGROUND: After primary PCI, 42% of patients will suffer a recurrent ischemic cardiovascular event. Although adherence to therapeutic regimen contributes to prevent recurrence, patient adherence remains low. To strengthen it, learning needs and self-efficacy must be considered when developing effective therapeutic patient education (TPE). METHODS: Learning needs and self-efficacy were assessed using the Cardiac Patient Learning Needs Inventory (CPLNI) and the Cardiac Self-Efficacy Scale among inpatients and outpatients. The STROBE checklist for cross-sectional studies was used in reporting this study. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients participated in the study with a participation rate of 73.9%. The CPLNI median total score was significantly higher in inpatients than in outpatients: 4.23 (3.82, 4.64) versus 3.67 (3.33, 4.09), p < .001. In both units, participants declared that the most important need was related to 'anatomy and physiology' of the heart. Despite the high score, the least important need was about 'physical activity' for inpatients and 'miscellaneous information' for outpatients. No statistically significant differences were found among patients from both units regarding their self-efficacy level. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that after PCI, patients have high learning needs and moderate levels of self-efficacy that require addressing. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Patient's individual learning needs and self-efficacy level must be assessed prior/after PCI. A tailored TPE that considers individual learning needs and self-efficacy is recommended as a preventative measure to reduce recurrent ischemic cardiovascular events. Nurses can play a key role in this process. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: For feasibility reasons, patients and public were not involved in the design, conduct, reporting or dissemination plans of this research.

Measuring change in clinical profiles between hospital admission and discharge and predicting living arrangements at discharge for aged patients presenting behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia.

BACKGROUND: The clinical courses of psychogeriatric inpatients presenting behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia, between their admission and discharge, have been poorly documented. Based upon our previously elaborated profiles of psychogeriatric patients, this study aimed to describe these courses and to explore whether changing clinical profiles could predict living arrangements at discharge. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected on 397 patients with dementia and hospitalized from 2011 to 2014 in French-speaking Switzerland. Patients were classified on admission and at discharge using four clinical profiles (BPSD-affective, BPSD-functional, BPSD-somatic, and BPSD-psychotic). Multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors of living arrangements at discharge. Age, gender, marital status, living arrangements on admission, and clinical profile on admission and discharge, were used as potential predictors. RESULTS: Of the patients classified as BPSD-functional or BPSD-affective on admission, 70.18% and 73.48%, respectively, had the same classification at discharge. However, 45.74% of patients classified as BPSD-somatic on admission were discharged with a BPSD-functional profile, and 46.15% of inpatients classified as BPSD-psychotic on admission were discharged as BPSD-affective (χ(2)(9)=128.8299; p<0.000). At discharge, 64.99% of all patients were admitted to a nursing home. The significant predictors of return to home were: being male (OR=0.96; 95% CI: 0.93-0.99) and BPSD-affective profile (OR=1.95; 95% CI: 1.08-3.54. Significant predictors of transfer to acute care or death were: BPSD-somatic (OR=12.98; 95% CI: 1.96-85.91) or BPSD-psychotic profile (OR=13.53; 95% CI: 1.65-111.05). DISCUSSION: This study provides new information concerning the clinical course of older psychogeriatric inpatients using profiles derived from clinically sensitive profiles.