Conectar
To investigate whether chronic diseases are associated with higher COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and explore factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in patients with chronic diseases.
Vaccine hesitancy has been acknowledged as one of the greatest hazards to public health. However, little information is available about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among patients with chronic diseases who may be more susceptible to COVID-19 infection, severe disease or death.
From 6 to 9 August 2021, we performed an internet-based cross-sectional survey with 22,954 participants (14.78% participants with chronic diseases). Propensity score matching with 1:1 nearest neighbourhood was used to reduce confounding factors between patients with chronic diseases and the general population. Using a multivariable logistic regression model, the factors impacting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were identified among patients with chronic diseases.
Both before and after propensity score matching, patients with chronic diseases had higher COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy than the general population. In addition, self-reported poor health, multiple chronic diseases, lower sociodemographic backgrounds and lower trust in nurses and doctors were associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among patients with chronic diseases.
Patients with chronic diseases were more hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine. Nurses should focus on patients with chronic diseases with poor health conditions, low socioeconomic backgrounds and low trust in the healthcare system.
Clinical nurses are recommended to not only pay more attention to the health status and sociodemographic characteristics of patients with chronic diseases but also build trust between nurses and patients by improving service levels and professional capabilities in clinical practice.
Patients or the public were not involved in setting the research question, the outcome measures, or the design or implementation of the study. However, all participants were invited to complete the digital informed consent and questionnaires.
To identify how family caregivers adapt to the caregiving role following a relative's COVID-19-related intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalisation.
Family caregiving is often associated with poor health amongst caregivers which may limit their capacity to effectively support patients. Though severe COVID-19 infection has necessitated increasing numbers of persons who require caregiver support, little is known about these caregivers, the persons they are caring for, or the strategies used to effectively adjust to the caregiving role.
A qualitative descriptive study design was adopted, and findings are reported using COREQ.
A secondary analysis of transcripts from semi-structured interviews conducted with recently discharged ICU patients who had COVID-19 (n = 16) and their family caregivers (n = 16) was completed using thematic analysis. MAXQDA 2020 and Miro were used to organise data and complete coding. Analysis involved a structured process of open and closed coding to identify and confirm themes that elucidated adaptation to family caregiving.
Six themes highlight how family caregivers adapt to the caregiving role following an ICU COVID-19-related hospitalisation including (1) engaging the support of family and friends, (2) increased responsibilities to accommodate caregiving, (3) managing emotions, (4) managing infection control, (5) addressing patient independence and (6) engaging support services. These themes were found to be congruent with the Roy adaptation model.
Family caregiving is a stressful transition following a patient's acute hospitalisation. Effective adaptation requires flexibility and sufficient support, beginning with the care team who can adequately prepare the family for the anticipated challenges of recovery.
Clinical teams may improve post-hospitalisation care outcomes of patients by preparing families to effectively adjust to the caregiver role—particularly in identifying sufficient support resources.
Participation of patients/caregivers in this study was limited to the data provided through participant interviews.
To explore the priorities of women mothering children in the context of intimate partner violence and to understand what shapes those priorities.
A qualitative study using interpretive description, informed by Feminist Intersectionality adhering to the COREQ guidelines.
Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.
Dialogic, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a community sample of 20 adult Canadian women who were mothering dependent children (under 18 years) in the context of recent intimate partner violence from a current or former partner.
Women's main priorities focused on their own and their children's well-being and creating stability related to housing and finances. Three themes identified: it's all about the kids; my safety…totally disregarded; and I have to take care of him. Multiple external factors (coercive control, structural inequities, assumptions about mothering) shape priorities and the tensions arising from competing priorities women felt compelled to address simultaneously.
Priorities of women mothering in the context of intimate partner violence are complex, shaped not only by what they want but by the limited options available to them given constraints such as income, employment, housing and service responses. Coercive control, structural inequities and assumptions about mothering are important factors influencing mothers' priorities and experiences. Better understanding mothers' priorities can support better tailored policies, services and nursing practice.
Structural inequities that negatively impact health and well-being by limiting access to resources and the supports needed to enhance health can be better recognized and addressed through a trauma and violence informed care approach.
This study addressed understanding the priorities of women mothering in the context of intimate partner violence. This research will impact women mothering in the context of intimate partner violence who receive care from nurses and other providers as well as those who provide care.
This study adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines (the COREQ checklist).
The women who took part in the interviews for this study did not participate in the study design, analysis or manuscript preparation.
The aims of the study were to explore the experiences of women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and their partners and examine the factors influencing partner involvement in GDM management, seeking to inform a targeted couple-based intervention.
A descriptive qualitative study.
We conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 women with GDM and their partners. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling from a tertiary hospital in Xi'an, China. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.
Three themes and 12 subthemes were identified. Theme I: Women's expectations of their partner's involvement in GDM management—practical support and emotional support. Theme II: Partner involvement in GDM management—constructive involvement, unhelpful involvement with good intentions and insufficient involvement. Theme III: Factors that influence partner involvement in GDM—knowledge of GDM, GDM risk perception, health consciousness, attitudes towards the treatment plan, couple communication regarding GDM management, family roles and appraisal of GDM management responsibility.
Women desired practical and emotional support from partners. The types of partner involvement in GDM management varied. Some partners provided constructive support, while some partners' involvement was limited, non-existent or actively unhelpful. By combining these results with the factors influencing partner involvement, our findings may help healthcare professionals develop strategies to involve partners in GDM care and enhance women's ability to manage GDM.
Partner involvement in GDM care may help them understand and better attend to women's needs, thus improving their experience and potential outcomes. This study highlights novel factors that need to be considered in developing couple-based interventions for this population.
The reporting follows the COREQ checklist.
Some patients were involved in data interpretation. There is no public contribution.
FreshRSS 