The aim of this study was to study the simultaneous relationships of work pressure with the performance and well‐being of nurses and to explore whether mindfulness moderates these relationships.
A cross‐sectional survey design.
We conducted a cross‐sectional survey of 1,021 nurses from 103 Belgian care homes for older people, in 2017. Data were analysed using hierarchical multiple regression and simple slope analyses.
Work pressure was positively associated with empathetic care, job performance and emotional exhaustion and negatively associated with work engagement. Mindfulness was positively related to empathetic care, job performance and work engagement and negatively related to emotional exhaustion. Regarding the moderations, mindfulness moderated the relationships between work pressure and both performance outcomes, as well as between work pressure and work engagement. Contrary to what we expected: (a) mindfulness showed no significant buffering effect of work pressure on emotional exhaustion; (b) the relationship between work pressure and both empathic care and job performance was stronger when mindfulness was low (vs. high); and (c) mindfulness strengthened instead of weakened the negative relationship between work pressure and work engagement. However, in high work pressure settings, more mindful individuals still had better job performance and work engagement outcomes than less mindful individuals.
Our findings explain conflicting outcomes on the effects of work pressure by suggesting that work pressure can function both as a hindrance and a challenge job demand depending on the outcome. Furthermore, by exploring the role of mindfulness as a personal resource, we add to the literature on the role of personal resources in the job demands–resources (JD‐R)‐model which is particularly relevant in the context of increasing work pressure.
Nurses are confronted with increasing work pressure. The present findings indicate that the implementation of mindfulness strategies can be beneficial for nurses dealing with work pressure, contributing to nursing practice and JD‐R theory.
Chronic non-specific low back pain is a major public health problem. Evidence supports the effectiveness of exercise as an intervention. Due to a paucity of direct comparisons of different exercise categories, medical guidelines were unable to make specific recommendations regarding the type of exercise working best in improving chronic low back pain. This network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials aims to investigate the comparative efficacy of different exercise interventions in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain.
MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, SPORTDiscus, Clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform search portal were searched on November 2019 and without language restrictions. The search will be updated after data analysis. Studies on adults with non-specific low back pain of at least 12 weeks duration comparing exercise to either no specific intervention (ie, no treatment, wait-list or usual care at the treating physician’s discretion) and/or functionally inert interventions (ie, sham or attention control interventions) will be eligible. Pain intensity and back-specific disability are defined as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes will include health-related physical and mental quality of life, work disability, frequency of analgesic use and adverse events. All outcomes will be analysed short-term, intermediate-term and long-term. Data will be extracted independently by two review authors. Risk of bias will be assessed using the recommendations by the Cochrane Back and Neck Group and be based on an adaptation of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.
This NMA will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses_NMA checklist. The results will be presented in peer-reviewed journals, implemented in existing national and international guidelines and will be presented to health care providers and decision makers. The planned completion date of the study is 1 July 2021.
Because of the lack of prehospital protocols to rule out a non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), patients with chest pain are often transferred to the emergency department (ED) for thorough evaluation. However, in low-risk patients, an ACS is rarely found, resulting in unnecessary healthcare consumption. Using the HEART (History, ECG, Age, Risk factors and Troponin) score, low-risk patients are easily identified. When a point-of-care (POC) troponin measurement is included in the HEART score, an ACS can adequately be ruled out in low-risk patients in the prehospital setting. However, it remains unclear whether a prehospital rule-out strategy using the HEART score and a POC troponin measurement in patients with suspected NSTE-ACS is cost-effective.
The ARTICA trial is a randomised trial in which the primary objective is to investigate the cost-effectiveness after 30 days of an early rule-out strategy for low-risk patients suspected of a NSTE-ACS, using a modified HEART score including a POC troponin T measurement. Patients are included by ambulance paramedics and 1:1 randomised for (1) presentation at the ED (control group) or (2) POC troponin T measurement (intervention group) and transfer of the care to the general practitioner in case of a low troponin T value. In total, 866 patients will be included. Follow-up will be performed after 30 days, 6 months and 12 months.
This trial has been accepted by the Medical Research Ethics Committee region Arnhem-Nijmegen. The results of this trial will be disseminated in one main paper and in additional papers with subgroup analyses.
Netherlands Trial Register (NL7148).
As clinical practice guidelines vary widely in their search strategies and recommendations of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for depression, this overview aimed at systematically summarising the level 1 evidence on CAM for patients with a clinical diagnosis of depression.
PubMed, PsycInfo and Central were searched for meta-analyses of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) until 30 June 2018. Outcomes included depression severity, response, remission, relapse and adverse events. The quality of evidence was assessed according to Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) considering the methodological quality of the RCTs and meta-analyses, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision of the evidence and the potential risk of publication bias.
The literature search revealed 26 meta-analyses conducted between 2002 and 2018 on 1–49 RCTs in major, minor and seasonal depression. In patients with mild to moderate major depression, moderate quality evidence suggested the efficacy of St. John’s wort towards placebo and its comparative effectiveness towards standard antidepressants for the treatment for depression severity and response rates, while St. John’s wort caused significant less adverse events. In patients with recurrent major depression, moderate quality evidence showed that mindfulness-based cognitive therapy was superior to standard antidepressant drug treatment for the prevention of depression relapse. Other CAM evidence was considered as having low or very low quality.
The effects of all but two CAM treatments found in studies on clinical depressed patients based on low to very low quality of evidence. The evidence has to be downgraded mostly due to avoidable methodological flaws of both the original RCTs and meta-analyses not following the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Further research is needed.
Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) is a common condition in both sexes that may deteriorate into heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (pEF), although this seems to happen more often in women than in men. Both LVDD and HFpEF often go unrecognised, necessitating the discovery of biomarkers that aid both the identification of individuals with LVDD at risk of developing HF and identification of individuals most likely to benefit from treatment.
HELPFul is an ongoing case-cohort study at a Dutch cardiology outpatient clinic enrolling patients aged 45 years and older without history of cardiovascular disease, who were referred by the general practitioner for cardiac evaluation. We included a random sample of patients and enriched the cohort with cases (defined as an E/e’ ≥8 measured with echocardiography). Information about medical history, cardiovascular risk factors, electrocardiography, echocardiography, exercise test performance, common carotid intima-media thickness measurement and standard cardiovascular biomarkers was obtained from the routine care data collected by the cardiology outpatient clinic. Study procedure consists of extensive venous blood collection for biobanking and additional standardised questionnaires. Follow-up will consist of standardised questionnaires by mail and linkage to regional and national registries. We will perform cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and coronary CT angiography in a subgroup of patients to investigate the extent of macrovascular and microvascular coronary disease.
The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University Medical Center Utrecht. Results will be disseminated through national and international conferences and in peer-reviewed journals in cardiovascular disease.
Anatomic stenosis evaluation on coronary CT angiography (CCTA) lacks specificity in indicating the functional significance of a stenosis. Recent developments in CT techniques (including dual-layer spectral detector CT [SDCT] and static stress CT perfusion [CTP]) and image analyses (including fractional flow reserve [FFR] derived from CCTA images [FFRCT] and deep learning analysis [DL]) are potential strategies to increase the specificity of CCTA by combining both anatomical and functional information in one investigation. The aim of the current study is to assess the diagnostic performance of (combinations of) SDCT, CTP, FFRCT and DL for the identification of functionally significant coronary artery stenosis.
Seventy-five patients aged 18 years and older with stable angina and known coronary artery disease and scheduled to undergo clinically indicated invasive FFR will be enrolled. All subjects will undergo the following SDCT scans: coronary calcium scoring, static stress CTP, rest CCTA and if indicated (history of myocardial infarction) a delayed enhancement acquisition. Invasive FFR of ≤0.80, measured within 30 days after the SDCT scans, will be used as reference to indicate a functionally significant stenosis. The primary study endpoint is the diagnostic performance of SDCT (including CTP) for the identification of functionally significant coronary artery stenosis. Secondary study endpoint is the diagnostic performance of SDCT, CTP, FFRCT and DL separately and combined for the identification of functionally significant coronary artery stenosis.
Ethical approval was obtained. All subjects will provide written informed consent. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed conference presentations and journal publications.