Search

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced hospital work and healthcare workers all over the world. We explored how Danish nurses coped with the fast, comprehensive organisational changes in their workplace and identified barriers to and facilitators for organisations ensuring the best possible conditions for nurses to meet these challenges. The study focuses on the organisational setting and how it did or did not support the nurses in their work., Methods: A qualitative explorative design was used in interviewing 23 nurses who had worked at a COVID-19 ward in one of three hospitals. Data were collected in the summer of 2020, and the analysis was inspired by Paul Ricoeur's theory of narratives and interpretation., Results: The presence of managers in the wards helped the nurses in the form of psychological and practical support. Working within an organisation that provides a safe environment was essential for nurses. The experience of a safe environment allowed nurses to ask questions, which supported them in finding solutions to specific tasks in the new and critical working environment. Barriers to handling the new situation were an absence of managers and a lack of a sense of belongingness and trust., Conclusion: This study highlights the need for management to be present in the ward and for organisational support to be available to nurses so they can provide optimal treatment and care when working in new and unknown conditions during a pandemic. Practical assistance from managers to ease the job is beneficial. Furthermore, the presence of management is essential to provide psychological support and create a safe environment because this allows nurses to ask questions about how to better manage new and critical tasks., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Hospitalised patients sleep less and have a lower quality of sleep compared to patients who recover in their own home. Low sleep quality is associated with complications such as increased pain sensation, delirium and reduced rehabilitation capacity., Purpose: To investigate patients' self-reported sleep quality and factors related to sleep quality during admission to a department of Orthopaedic Surgery., Methods: The Richard-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire was used to assess patients' sleep quality, measured using a VAS 0-100 scale, (a higher score indicating good sleep quality). The moderated Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index assessed the most severe and frequent barriers to high sleep quality., Results: A total of 533 patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery participated. There was an overall mean sleep quality score of 54. The most common and severe factors impacting sleep quality were; waking during the night, difficulties falling asleep, waking early, waking for toileting or pain. The intensity of the pain was found to be proportional to the quality of sleep., Conclusion: Patients reported their overall quality of sleep to be moderately good due to difficulties falling asleep, waking up during the night or early morning and having pain. The results call for better pain management and non-pharmacological nursing interventions to optimise sleep quality., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Registry-based repeated-measures psychometric validation of the Danish Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)., Objective: The goal was to use classical and modern psychometric validation methods to assess the measurement properties and the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) of the ODI in a Danish cohort of patients with chronic low back pain being treated with spinal surgery., Summary of Background Data: Scores for the ODI, EQ-5D, SF-36, leg pain, back pain, and a general rating of pain item from 800 patients with chronic low back pain were extracted from the National Danish Spine Registry (DaneSpine) at baseline and 1-year postspine surgery., Methods: Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory (IRT) models were used to assess the psychometric properties of the ODI. MCID was also calculated based on generic legacy PROMs (EQ-5D and SF-36) and follow-up pain scores., Results: While ODI did not fit a Rasch model, adequate fit to a confirmatory factor analysis and a two-parameter item response theory model was found when accounting for differential item functioning across diagnostic subgroups (degenerative spondylolisthesis, spondylosis, spinal stenosis, and herniated intervertebral disc). In addition, each group exhibited substantially different MCID values., Conclusion: The Danish version of the ODI is valid and responsive, but only within each of the four major diagnosis subgroups: degenerative spondylolisthesis, spondylosis, spinal stenosis, and herniated intervertebral disc., Level of Evidence: 4.

Introduction: Treatment of hip fractures has evolved since the introduction of fast-track surgical programs in the late 1990s. The aim of our study was to describe the quality of treatment and care related to fast-track hip fracture surgery in Denmark by external audit of patient records., Material and Methods: This was a national multicenter audit of hospital charts from each hospital treating ≥ 50 hip fracture patients per year (n = 594)., Results: The study demonstrated significant variability in treatment and care of patients with hip fractures among the regions of Denmark. Pain management, nutritional screening, ambulation characteristics, training in activities of daily living, and rehabilitation planning were consistently inadequate. Length of stay was 7-11 days., Conclusion: Although the principles for fast-track surgery have been adapted to some extent at all departments in Denmark with an annual treatment of at least 50 patients with hip fractures, no single department has implemented the whole package. Hospital stay has been reduced since the introduction of fast-track regimes, and improvements were seen in many of the quality indicators. Implications for future practice include better adherence to clinical guidelines, a more homogeneous documentation system in nursing, promotion of evidence-based standards, and improved treatment and care of the physical and psychological consequences of hospitalization.