Conectar
This observational study compares the effectiveness of baricitinib (BARI), a targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (tsDMARD), with alternative biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), from a prospective, longitudinal cohort.
We compared patients initiating a treatment course (TC) of BARI, tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or bDMARDs with other modes of action (OMA), during a period when all these DMARDs were available in Switzerland. The primary outcome was drug maintenance; secondary outcomes included discontinuation rates related specifically to ineffectiveness and adverse events. We further analysed rates of low disease activity (LDA) and remission (REM) at 12 months and drug maintenance in bDMARD-naïve and tsDMARD-naïve population.
A total of 1053 TCs were included: 273 on BARI, 473 on TNFi and 307 on OMA. BARI was prescribed to older patients with longer disease duration and more previous treatment failures than TNFi. Compared with BARI, the adjusted drug maintenance was significantly shorter for TNFi (HR for discontinuation: 1.76; 95% CI, 1.32 to 2.35) but not compared with OMA (HR 1.27; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.72). These results were similar in the b/tsDMARD-naïve population. The higher discontinuation of TNFi was mostly due to increased discontinuation for ineffectiveness (HR 1.49; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.15), with no significant differences in drug discontinuation for adverse events (HR 1.46; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.57). The LDA and REM rates at 12 months did not differ significantly between the three groups.
BARI demonstrated a significantly higher drug maintenance compared with TNFi, mainly due to lower drug discontinuations for ineffectiveness. We found no difference in drug maintenance between BARI and OMA. Clinical outcomes did not differ between the three groups. Our results suggest that BARI is an appropriate therapeutic alternative to bDMARDs in the management of RA.
Sustainable approaches to support care coordination and symptom management needs of critically ill adults living with multimorbidity are needed to combat the challenges and complexity that multimorbidity presents. The study aims to test the feasibility of the Care cOORDInatioN And sympTom managEment (COORDINATE) intervention to improve health outcomes of adults living with multimorbidity.
A multicomponent nurse-driven intervention was developed using experience-based co-design and human-centred design. Inclusion criteria include (1) age 55 years and older, (2) admitted to an intermediate care unit, (3) presence of two or more chronic health conditions and (4) signed informed consent. Data collection will occur at baseline (time of recruitment predischarge) and 6 weeks and 3 months following hospital discharge. Outcome of interest from this feasibility study is to evaluate the financial, technical and logistic feasibility of a full-scale study including data collection and protocol adherence. Additionally, Cohen’s d effect sizes for the change in outcomes over time will be computed to establish power calculations required for a full-scale study. The protocol was prepared in accordance with Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) checklist.
The study has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions. Given the success of this feasibility study, the potential for the COORDINATE intervention to decrease the symptom burden and improve participant quality of life among critically ill people with multimorbidity will be tested in a full-scale study, and findings will be actively disseminated.
To shed light on the process of advocacy in the context of community health nursing, through a methodology inspired by the epistemologies of the South.
We conducted a collaborative ethnography in a community health centre in Canada.
de Sousa Santos' epistemologies of the South, a typology of advocacy and main themes from historic research informed the methodology. Data were collected between 2016 and 2018 through 420 h of fieldwork observations and three group discussions, including a collective process to co-construct interpretations with participants. Twenty-one nurses participated in the study.
Nurses had sufficient work flexibility to practice advocacy actions focused on individuals and groups. They also engaged in attempts at policy reform in the form of defending access to appropriate care and changing the mode of care organization. However, these were curbed by bureaucracy and administrative rules, resulting in the eventual dismissal of health promotion actions and experiences of moral distress.
Despite the political climate of their work environment impeding social justice agendas, nurses' advocacy practices showed a persistence of moral values and ideals in coherence with the regional nursing legacy.
Acting at the organizational level and involving field nurses in decision making are potential avenues for increasing policy advocacy efficacy.
Examining contexts through another epistemic lens and methods of research drawing on history and anthropology has shed light on a process of advocacy. This research shows that organizations need to equip themselves with mechanisms to promote the sharing of realities between nurses, thereby building collective advocacy.
The research adheres to the EQUATOR guidelines with SRQR and COREQ methods.
No patient or public contribution.
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is associated with multiple adverse health consequences. Nurses (including midwives) are well positioned to identify patients subjected to IPV, and provide care, support, and referrals. However, studies about nursing response to IPV are limited especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The study aimed to examine nurses' perceived preparedness and opinions toward IPV and to identify barriers and facilitators in responding to IPV.
An explanatory sequential mixed-methods study was conducted by collecting quantitative data first and explaining the quantitative findings with qualitative data.
The study was conducted in two tertiary general hospitals in northeastern (Shenyang city) and southwestern (Chengdu city) China with 1500 and 1800 beds, respectively. A total of 1071 survey respondents (1039 female [97.0%]) and 43 interview participants (34 female [79.1%]) were included in the study. An online survey was administered from September 3 to 23, 2020, using two validated scales from the Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey. In-depth, semistructured interviews were conducted from September 15 to December 23, 2020, guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
The survey respondents largely agreed with feeling prepared to manage IPV, e.g., respond to discourses (544 [50.8%] of 1071) and report to police (704 [65.7%] of 1071). The findings of surveyed opinions (i.e., Response competencies; Routine practice; Actual activities; Professionals; Victims; Alcohol/drugs) were mixed and intertwined with social desirability bias. The quantitative and qualitative data were consistent, contradicted, and supplemented. Key qualitative findings were revealed that may explain the quantitative results, including lack of actual preparedness, absence of IPV-related education, training, or practice, and socially desirable responses (especially those pertaining to China's Anti-domestic Violence Law). Commonly reported barriers (e.g., patients' reluctance to disclose; time constraints) and facilitators (e.g., patients' strong need for help; female nurses' gender advantage), as well as previously unreported barriers (e.g., IPV may become a workplace taboo if there are healthcare professionals known as victims/perpetrators of IPV) and facilitators (e.g., nurses' responses can largely meet the first-line support requirements even without formal education or training on IPV) were identified.
Nurses may play a unique and important role in responding to IPV in LMICs where recognition is limited, education and training are absent, policies are lacking, and resources are scarce. Our findings support World Health Organization recommendations for selective screening.
The study highlights the great potential of nurses for IPV prevention and intervention especially in LMICs. The identified barriers and facilitators are important evidence for developing multifaceted interventions to address IPV in the health sector.
FreshRSS 