Search

Chagas disease (CD) is considered to be highly endemic in El Salvador, where its prevalence is estimated to be 1.3–3.7%. Although more than 40,000 migrants from El Salvador are currently living in Europe (particularly in Spain and Italy), there are few data regarding the prevalence of CD in this population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of CD among Salvadorans living in Italy. A cross-sectional serological survey of CD among Salvadorans living in the metropolitan area of Milan was carried out between October 2017 and December 2019. The participants' blood samples were tested for Trypanosoma cruzi antibodies using two different serological assays. The collected demographic data included their biological sex, province of origin, the type of housing in their country of origin, and family history of CD. Of the 384 subjects who voluntarily participated in the study, five (1.3%, most coming from La Paz) were positive to both serological assays and therefore conclusively diagnosed as having CD. Five other subjects had discrepant serological results but were not positive to a third assay. Three of the five subjects with a diagnosis of CD completed medical staging, one of whom had chronic disease (digestive and cardiac involvement). The prevalence of CD among Salvadorans living in Milan is similar to that estimated by the WHO in 2010. Although they are often overlooked in CD surveys, Salvadoran migrants should be included in CD control programs in countries in which the disease is not endemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is thought to be due to an abnormal interaction between the host immune system and commensal microflora. Within the intestinal immune system, B cells produce physiologically natural antibodies but pathologically atypical anti-neutrophil antibodies (xANCAs) are frequently observed in patients with IBD. The objective is to investigate the localisation of immunoglobulin-producing cells (IPCs) in samples of inflamed intestinal tissue taken from patients with IBD, and their possible relationship with clinical features. Methods The IPCs in small intestinal, colonic and rectal biopsy specimens of patients with IBD were analysed by means of immunofluorescence using polyclonal rabbit anti-human Ig and goat anti-human IgM. The B cell phenotype of the IPC-positive samples was assessed using monoclonal antibodies specific for CD79, CD20, CD23, CD21, CD5, λ and κ chains. Statistical correlations were sought between the histological findings and clinical expression. Results The study involved 96 patients (64 with ulcerative colitis and 32 with Crohn's disease). Two different patterns of B lymphocyte infiltrates were found in the intestinal tissue: one was characterised by a strong to moderate stromal localisation of small IgM+/CD79+/CD20-/CD21-/CD23-/CD5± IPCs (42.7% of cases); in the other (57.3%) no such small IPCs were detected in stromal or epithelial tissues. IPCs were significantly less frequent in the patients with Crohn's disease than in those with ulcerative colitis (p = 0.004). Conclusion Our findings suggest that different immunopathogenetic pathways underlie chronic intestinal inflammation with different clinical expressions. The presence of small B lymphocytes resembling B-1 cells also seemed to be negatively associated with Crohn's disease. It can therefore be inferred that the gut contains an alternative population of B cells that have a regulatory function.

Background: Undergraduate nursing students have been documented to experience ethical distress during their clinical training and felt poorly supported in discussing the ethical issues they encountered. Research aims: This study was aimed at exploring nursing students' perceived opportunity to discuss ethical issues that emerged during their clinical learning experience and associated factors. Research design: An Italian national cross-sectional study design was performed in 2015–2016. Participants were invited to answer a questionnaire composed of four sections regarding: (1) socio-demographic data, (2) previous clinical learning experiences, (3) current clinical learning experience quality and outcomes, and (4) the opportunity to discuss ethical issues with nurses in the last clinical learning experience (from 0 – 'never' to 3 – 'very much'). Participants and research context: Participants were 9607 undergraduate nursing students who were attending 95 different three-year Italian baccalaureate nursing programmes, located at 27 universities in 15 Italian regions. Ethical considerations: This study was conducted in accordance with the Human Subject Research Ethics Committee guidelines after the research protocol was approved by an ethics committee. Findings: Overall, 4707 (49%) perceived to have discussed ethical issues 'much' or 'very much'; among the remaining, 3683 (38.3%) and 1217 (12.7%) students reported the perception of having discussed, respectively, 'enough' or 'never' ethical issues emerged in the clinical practice. At the multivariate logistic regression analysis explaining 38.1% of the overall variance, the factors promoting ethical discussion were mainly set at the clinical learning environment levels (i.e. increased learning opportunities, self-directed learning, safety and nursing care quality, quality of the tutorial strategies, competences learned and supervision by a clinical nurse). In contrast, being male was associated with a perception of less opportunity to discuss ethical issues. Conclusion: Nursing faculties should assess the clinical environment prerequisites of the settings as a context of student experience before deciding on their accreditation. Moreover, the nursing faculty and nurse managers should also enhance competence with regard to discussing ethical issues with students among clinical nurses by identifying factors that hinder this learning opportunity in daily practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of L'Infermiere is the property of IPASVI - Italian Nursing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Context: Error reporting is considered one of the most important mediating factors for patient safety (PS). However, reporting errors can be challenging for health care students. Objectives: The aims of the study were: (i) to describe nursing students' opportunity to report errors, near misses or PS issues that emerged during their clinical learning experience; and (ii) to explore associated factors of the process of reporting itself. Methods: A national survey was conducted on 9607 (91.7%) undergraduate nursing students. The endpoint was to have reported PS issues in the last clinical learning experience (from 0 'never' to 3 'always'). Explanatory variables were set individual, nursing programme and regional levels. Results: A total of 4004 (41.7%) nursing students reported PS issues from 'never/rarely' to 'sometimes'. In the multi‐level analysis, factors increasing the likelihood of reporting events affecting PS have been mainly at the nursing programme level: specifically, higher learning opportunities (odds ratio [OR] = 3.040; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.667–3.466), self‐directed learning opportunities (OR = 1.491; 95% CI, 1.364–1.630), safety and nursing care quality (OR = 1.411; 95% CI, 1.250–1.594) and quality of tutorial strategies OR = 1.251; 95% CI, 1.113–1.406). By contrast, being supervised by a nurse teacher (OR = 0.523; 95% CI, 0.359–0.761) prevented the disclosure of PS issues compared with being supervised by a clinical nurse. Students attending their nursing programmes in some Italian regions showed a higher likelihood (OR from 1.346 to 2.938) of reporting PS issues compared with those undertaking their education in other regions. Conclusions: Nursing students continue to be reticent to report PS issues. Given that they represent the largest generation of future health care workers, their education regarding PS should be continuously monitored and improved; moreover, strategies aimed at developing a non‐blaming culture should be designed and implemented both at the clinical learning setting and regional levels. Palese et al. disclose that many nursing students do not discuss safety issues that emerge during their clinical practice, highlighting environmental features that discourage such reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

. The Clinical Learning Quality Evaluation Index for nursing students., Introduction: The Italian nursing programs, the need to introduce tools evaluating the quality of the clinical learning as perceived by nursing students. Several tools already exist, however, several limitations suggesting the need to develop a new tool., Aim: A national project aimed at developing and validating a new instrument capable of measuring the clinical learning quality as experience by nursing students., Methods: A validation study design was undertaken from 2015 to 2016. All nursing national programs (n=43) were invited to participate by including all nursing students attending regularly their clinical learning. The tool developed based upon a) literature, b) validated tools already established among other healthcare professionals, and c) consensus expressed by experts and nursing students, was administered to the eligible students., Results: 9606 nursing in 27 universities (62.8%) participated. The psychometric properties of the new instrument ranged from good to excellent. According to the findings, the tool consists in 22 items and five factors: a) quality of the tutorial strategies, b) learning opportunities; c) safety and nursing care quality; d) self-direct learning; e) quality of the learning environment., Conclusions: The tool is already used. Its systematic adoption may support comparison among settings and across different programs; moreover, the tool may also support in accrediting new settings as well as in measuring the effects of strategies aimed at improving the quality of the clinical learning.