Search

Aim This article investigates attitudes towards and awareness of research and use of research findings among primary healthcare nurses, determinants of attitudes and evaluation of psychometric properties of an instrument measuring nurses' attitudes. Background The production of new knowledge is ongoing and the amount of research of relevance for health care has increased, but there remains a gap between what is known and what is done in practice. To enhance evidence-based practice and patient safety, the use of research findings needs to be encouraged and promoted. Method An explanatory study using a cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2005-2006. The survey included items about background data and the instrument attitudes towards and awareness of research and development in nursing. 1054 nurses participated in the study. Factor analyses and Cronbach's alpha were used to evaluate internal structure and internal consistency of the instrument. Result The nurses generally held positive attitudes towards research. Although most of the nurses reported using research in practice, 37% claimed that they never or rarely used research findings. Half of the respondents perceived they had the ability to analyse scientific reports/articles. This ability and research use were significant determinants of attitudes. Factor analysis of the scale resulted in a three-factor solution, which differs from the seven-factor structure previously identified by the originators of the instrument. Conclusion Our results support the view that implementation of research is a complex process involving several factors. The different factor structure identified suggests that further work is needed on this instrument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy in multi-cultural primary care patients with longstanding backache is not evaluated. The purpose of this study was to investigate the outcome of a four weekly-treatment given by primary care physicians regarding pain-related worry, depression and severe pain and to determine which social, clinical or gender factors were associated with outcome.The study group consisted of 245 patients in consecutive order from 19 countries, 18 to 45 years, entering rehabilitation program because of longstanding backache. Prevalences of pain-related worry and depression and severe pain was counted and compared before and after. Logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ( OR; 95% CI) for persistent pain-related worry and/or persistent depression and severe pain ( VAS ≥ 50). The prevalences of pain-related worry and depression were both significantly lower after treatment (pain-related worry 83% before vs. 38% after; depression 43% before vs. 31% after). Also the number of patients scoring ≥ 50 VAS was a little, but significantly, fewer (68% vs. 61%). Use of interpreter doubled the risk of having persistent pain-related worry ( OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.1-4.1) but the risk was not significant regarding persistent depression ( OR 1.8; 0.6-5.4). The rating of VAS rating ≥ 50 after treatment was twice as high, OR 2.3 (95% CI 1.1-4.6) in the 38-45 year old age group. To conclude, a focus on pain ideas reduced pain-related worry and depression in these patients with various sociocultural backgrounds and longstanding backache. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scand J Caring Sci; 2013; 27; 380-387 Cognitive, psychosocial, somatic and treatment factors predicting return to work after breast cancer treatment Background: Breast cancer (BC) may affect the ability to work. In this study, we want to identify any associations between cognitive, psychosocial, somatic and treatment factors with time to return to work (RTW) among women treated for BC. Methods and participants: At eight (baseline) and 11(follow-up) months after BC diagnosis, women who had received adjuvant treatment for early BC at Stockholm South General Hospital completed the Headminder neuropsychological tests to obtain the Cognitive Stability Index (CSI), the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and its Breast Cancer Module. At both time points, we compared the scores from women who had returned to work with those who had not. We also reviewed the medical certificates of women still on sick leave at 8, 11 and 18 months after diagnosis to determine why they had not returned to work. Results: At baseline, 29 of 45 enroled women were working and 15 were not (one dropped out after baseline testing). The 14 women still not working 11 months after BC diagnosis had more advanced BC (OR = 3.64, 95% CI 2.01-7.31), lymph-node involvement (OR = 18.80, 95% CI 5.32-90.69) and Her 2-positive tumours (OR = 10.42,95% CI 2.19-65.32) than did working women. None of the scores for the four cognitive domains changed significantly at follow-up in either group. Comments on the medical certificates generally supported these findings. Independently of any adjuvant cancer therapy, overall quality of life improved and most women did RTW 18 months after BC diagnosis. Conclusions: Chemotherapy is associated with longer periods of sick leave. Cognitive functions do not predict RTW. Independently of any adjuvant therapy, most women eventually RTW in a few months. The ability to predict RTW after BC treatment should help prepare higher-risk patients for delayed RTW and allow earlier interventions to restore their social relations and quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]