Studies of violence towards nursing students (NSs) have been scattered mainly in the West and Middle East, but to date there have been no studies in Eastern countries. Differences in nursing education systems and cultures might have contributed to variations in incidences of clinical violence. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence, associated factors and impact of clinical violence to NSs.
This was a cross-sectional survey study. Convenience sampling was used to recruit university NSs from March to June 2012 in classroom settings in Hong Kong. A valid and reliable questionnaire was used to collect the data. 1297 questionnaires were distributed and 1017 NSs completed questionnaires, with a response rate of 78.41%.
Of the 1017 NSs, 37.3% (n=379) reported having experienced clinical violence during their nursing studies. The prevalence of verbal abuse (30.6%) was significantly greater than that of physical violence (16.5%). The perpetrators of verbal abuse were predominantly patients (66.8%), hospital staff (29.7%), university supervisors (13.4%) and patients’ relatives (13.2%). Patients (91.0%) were the greatest source of physically violent assaults. Compared with those who had experienced physical violence, the NSs who had experienced verbal abuse were more likely not to take action, and not to stop or report the incident, but were also more likely to tell their friends/families. Although the negative effects on emotions, clinical performance and the extent to which they were disturbed by the violence were significantly greater for verbal abuse than that for physical violence, their intention to leave the nursing profession after experiencing either verbal or physical violence was significantly higher after than before the experience (p
Our results found a moderately high prevalence of clinical violence among NSs. Provision and/or reinforcement of appropriate training about clinical violence in the nursing curricula is necessary.
Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%, as current significant implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) indication for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in heart failure (HF) patients, has been widely recognised to be inefficient. Improvement of patient selection for low LVEF (≤35%) is needed to optimise deployment of ICD. Most of the existing prediction models are not appropriate to identify ICD candidates at high risk of SCD in HF patients with low LVEF. Compared with traditional statistical analysis, machine learning (ML) can employ computer algorithms to identify patterns in large datasets, analyse rules automatically and build both linear and non-linear models in order to make data-driven predictions. This study is aimed to develop and validate new models using ML to improve the prediction of SCD in HF patients with low LVEF.
We will conduct a retroprospective, multicentre, observational registry of Chinese HF patients with low LVEF. The HF patients with LVEF ≤35% after optimised medication at least 3 months will be enrolled in this study. The primary endpoints are all-cause death and SCD. The secondary endpoints are malignant arrhythmia, sudden cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation and rehospitalisation due to HF. The baseline demographic, clinical, biological, electrophysiological, social and psychological variables will be collected. Both ML and traditional multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models will be developed and compared in the prediction of SCD. Moreover, the ML model will be validated in a prospective study.
The study protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (2017-SR-06). All results of this study will be published in international peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences.
Exploring whether medical professionals, who are considered to be ‘informed consumers’ in the healthcare system, favour large providers for elective treatments. In this study, we compare the inclination of medical professionals and their relatives undergoing treatment for childbirth and cataract surgery at medical centres, against those of the general population.
Retrospective study using a population-based matched cohort data.
Patients who underwent childbirth or cataract surgery between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2013.
We used multiple logistic regression to compare the ORs of medical professionals and their relatives undergoing treatment at medical centres, against those of the general population. We also compared the rate of 14-day re-admission (childbirth) and 14-day reoperation (cataract surgery) after discharge between these groups.
Multivariate analysis showed that physicians were more likely than patients with no familial connection to the medical profession to undergo childbirth at medical centres (OR 5.26, 95% CI 3.96 to 6.97, p
Medical professionals and their relatives are more likely than the general population to opt for service at medical centres. Understanding the reasons that medical professionals and general populations both have a preferential bias for larger medical institutions could help improve the efficiency of healthcare delivery.
End-stage kidney disease disproportionately affects people of South Asian origin. This study aimed to uncover the lived experiences of this group of patients on centre-based haemodialysis (HD), the most prevalent dialysis modality.
The study utilised a qualitative focus group methodology. Seven focus groups were conducted across four NHS Trusts in the UK including three in Gujarati and two each in Punjabi and Urdu. This provided an inclusive opportunity for South Asian patients to contribute in their language of origin. A total of 24 patients participated. Focus groups were facilitated by bilingual project workers and data were forward translated and analysed using thematic analysis.
Four themes were identified. This included (1) ‘treatment imposition’, which comprised of the restrictive nature of HD, the effects of treatment and the feeling of being trapped in an endless process. (2) The ‘patient–clinician relationship’ centred around the impact of a perceived lack of staff time, and inadequacies in the quality of interactions. (3) ‘Coping strategies’ highlighted the role of cognitive reappraisal, living in the moment and family support networks in facilitating adjustment. (4) ‘Pursuit of transplantation’ included equating this form of treatment with restoring normality, alongside cultural factors limiting hopefulness for receiving an organ.
In general, the experiences of South Asian patients receiving HD were not unique to this ethnic group. We did find distinct issues in relation to interactions with healthcare professionals, views on access to transplantation and the importance of family support networks. The study provides useful insights which may help enhance culturally tailored renal care.