Search

Dementia is a progressive condition that leads to reduced cognition, deteriorating communication and is a risk factor for other acute and chronic health problems. The rise in the prevalence of dementia means untreated pain is becoming increasingly common with healthcare staff being challenged to provide optimal pain management. This negatively impacts the person living with dementia and their carers. There is minimal evidence that explores the pain management experience of patients as they move through acute care settings.To understand the complexities of managing the pain of older people with dementia as they progress through acute care settings, with the view of assisting staff to improve practice.A Participatory Action Research approach, guided by the Promoting Action Research in Health Services framework, was used. Three Action Cycles were completed comprising of an exploratory audit and two case studies (Action Cycle One), three focus groups with a total of 14 participants (Action Cycle Two) and the development and implementation of immediate and long-term actions (Action Cycle Three).Thematic analysis identified four themes that affected pain management practices. These were not knowing the patient; balancing competing priorities; knowledge and understanding of pain and dementia and not assimilating available information.Pain management practices for patient living with dementia, across acute care settings, was influenced by shared ways of thinking and working. Not knowing the patient, fragmentation of information and having insufficient knowledge of the subtleties of dementia led participants to deliver task-focused, target and policy-driven care that was not person-centred in its approach. Facilitated reflection enabled acute care teams to actively participate in identifying problems and finding solutions to enhance practice.

Background Escalating levels of obesity place enormous and growing demands on Health care provision in the (U.K.) United Kingdom. Resources are limited with increasing and competing demands upon them. Ethical considerations underpin clinical decision making generally, but there is limited evidence regarding the relationship between these variables particularly in terms of treating individuals with obesity. Research aim To investigate the views of National Health Service (NHS) clinicians on navigating the ethical challenges and decision making associated with obesity management in adults with chronic illness. Research design A cross-sectional, multi-site survey distributed electronically. Participants A consensus sample of nurses, doctors, dietitians and final year students in two NHS Trusts and two Universities. Ethical considerations Ethical and governance approvals obtained from a National Ethics Committee (11NIR035), two universities and two teaching hospitals. Results Of the total ( n = 395) participants, the majority were nurses (48%), female (79%) and qualified clinicians (59%). Participants strongly considered the individual to have primary responsibility for a healthy weight and an obligation to attempt to maintain that healthy weight if they wish to access NHS care. Yet two thirds would not withhold treatment for patients with obesity. Discussion While clinicians were clear about patient responsibility and obligations, the majority prioritised their duty of care and would not invoke a utilitarian approach to decision making. This may reflect awareness of obesity as a multi-faceted entity, with responsibility for support and management shared amongst society in general. Conclusions The attitudes of this sample of clinicians complemented the concept of the health service as being built on a principle of community, with each treated according to their need. However limited resources challenge the concept of needs-based decisions consequently societal engagement is necessary to agree a pragmatic way forward.

Type 2 diabetes is a chronic condition primarily self-managed by the individual. Mastery is a protective factor linked to better control of chronic conditions, effective self-management and improved medication adherence. Mastery appears increasingly important as treatment regimens and self-management demands become more complex and burdensome. Diabetes distress negatively impacts self-management, glycaemic control and treatment adherence. Understanding the relationship between diabetes distress and mastery may provide opportunities to improve condition management and adherence . This relationship may be impacted by other factors affecting the individual's perceived sense of control over their condition. This study examined the role of diabetes empowerment and depression in the relationship between diabetes distress and mastery. Data were drawn from a randomised controlled trial of 131 adults with type 2 diabetes transitioning to injection therapy. Participants completed measures of diabetes distress , mastery , depression and empowerment . Diabetes distress and depression were negatively associated with mastery, whilst diabetes empowerment was positively associated . A significant interaction effect (b = .024, t(112) = 3.79, p =

AimTo estimate and examine hospitalisation costs of Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes in an Irish public hospital.MethodsA retrospective audit of hospital inpatient admissions over a 5-year period was undertaken, and a wide range of admission-related data were collected for a sample of 7,548 admissions. Hospitalisations were costed using the diagnosis-related group methodology. A series of descriptive, univariate and multivariate regression analyses were undertaken.ResultsThe mean hospitalisation cost for Type 1 diabetes was €4,027 and for Type 2 diabetes was €5,026 per admission. Sex, admission type and length of stay were significantly associated with hospitalisation costs for admissions with a primary diagnosis of Type 1 diabetes. Age, admission type, diagnosis status, complications status, discharge destination, length of stay and year were significantly associated with hospitalisation costs for admissions with a primary diagnosis of Type 2 diabetes. Length of stay was associated with higher mean costs, with each additional day increasing Type 1 diabetes costs by €260 (p = 0.001) and Type 2 diabetes by €216 (p < 0.001). Unscheduled admissions were associated with significantly lower costs than elective admissions; €1,578 (p = 0.035) lower for Type 1 diabetes and €2,108 (p < 0.001) lower for Type 2 diabetes.ConclusionsThis study presents estimates of the costs of diabetes care in the Irish public hospital system and identifies the factors which influence costs for Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. These findings may be of interest to patients, the public, researchers and those with influence over diabetes policy and practice in Ireland and internationally.