Advancement of the German version of the moral distress scale for acute care nurses : a mixed methods study

Aim: Moral distress experienced by nurses in acute care hospitals can adversely impact the affected nurses, their patients and their hospitals; therefore, it is advisable for organizations to establish internal monitoring of moral distress. However, until now, no suitable questionnaire has been available for use in German‐speaking contexts. Hence, the aim of this study was to develop and psychometrically test a German‐language version of the Moral Distress Scale. Design: We chose a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, followed by a second quantitative cross‐sectional survey. Methods: An American moral distress scale was chosen, translated, culturally adapted, tested in a pilot study and subsequently used in 2011 to conduct an initial web‐based quantitative cross‐sectional survey of nurses in all inpatient units at five hospitals in Switzerland's German‐speaking region. Data were analysed descriptively and via a Rasch analysis. In 2012, four focus group interviews were conducted with 26 nurses and then evaluated using knowledge maps. The results were used to improve the questionnaire. In 2015, using the revised German‐language instrument, a second survey and Rasch analysis were conducted. Results: The descriptive results of the first survey's participants (n = 2153; response rate: 44%) indicated that moral distress is a salient phenomenon in Switzerland. The data from the focus group interviews and the Rasch analysis produced information valuable for the questionnaire's further development. Alongside the data from the second survey's participants (n = 1965; response rate: 40%), the Rasch analysis confirmed the elimination of previous deficiencies on its psychometrics. A Rasch‐scaled German version of the Moral Distress Scale is now available for use

Who Is at Risk for Diagnostic Discrepancies? Comparison of Pre- and Postmortal Diagnoses in 1800 Patients of 3 Medical Decades in East and West Berlin

<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Autopsy rates in Western countries consistently decline to an average of <5%, although clinical autopsies represent a reasonable tool for quality control in hospitals, medically and economically. Comparing pre- and postmortal diagnoses, diagnostic discrepancies as uncovered by clinical autopsies supply crucial information on how to improve clinical treatment. The study aimed at analyzing current diagnostic discrepancy rates, investigating their influencing factors and identifying risk profiles of patients that could be affected by a diagnostic discrepancy.</p> <h3>Methods and Findings</h3><p>Of all adult autopsy cases of the Charité Institute of Pathology from the years 1988, 1993, 1998, 2003 and 2008, the pre- and postmortal diagnoses and all demographic data were analyzed retrospectively. Based on power analysis, 1,800 cases were randomly selected to perform discrepancy classification (class I-VI) according to modified Goldman criteria. The rate of discrepancies in major diagnoses (class I) was 10.7% (95% CI: 7.7%–14.7%) in 2008 representing a reduction by 15.1%. Subgroup analysis revealed several influencing factors to significantly correlate with the discrepancy rate. Cardiovascular diseases had the highest frequency among class-I-discrepancies. Comparing the 1988-data of East- and West-Berlin, no significant differences were found in diagnostic discrepancies despite an autopsy rate differing by nearly 50%. A risk profile analysis visualized by intuitive heatmaps revealed a significantly high discrepancy rate in patients treated in low or intermediate care units at community hospitals. In this collective, patients with genitourinary/renal or infectious diseases were at particularly high risk.</p> <h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This is the current largest and most comprehensive study on diagnostic discrepancies worldwide. Our well-powered analysis revealed a significant rate of class-I-discrepancies indicating that autopsies are still of value. The identified risk profiles may aid both pathologists and clinicians to identify patients at increased risk for a discrepant diagnosis and possibly suboptimal treatment intra vitam.</p> </div

An interdisciplinary intervention to prevent falls in community-dwelling elderly persons: protocol of a cluster-randomized trial [PreFalls]

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Prevention of falls in the elderly is a public health target in many countries around the world. While a large number of trials have investigated the effectiveness of fall prevention programs, few focussed on interventions embedded in the general practice setting and its related network. In the Prevent Falls (PreFalls) trial we aim to investigate the effectiveness of a pre-tested multi-modal intervention compared to usual care in this setting.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>PreFalls is a controlled multicenter prospective study with cluster-randomized allocation of about 40 general practices to an experimental or a control group. We aim to include 382 community dwelling persons aged 65 and older with an increased risk of falling. All participating general practitioners are trained to systematically assess the risk of falls using a set of validated tests. Patients from intervention practices are invited to participate in a 16-weeks exercise program with focus on fall prevention delivered by specifically trained local physiotherapists. Patients from practices allocated to the control group receive usual care. Main outcome measure is the number of falls per individual in the first 12 months (analysis by negative binomial regression). Secondary outcomes include falls in the second year, the proportion of participants falling in the first and the second year, falls associated with injury, risk of falls, fear of falling, physical activity and quality of life.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Reducing falls in the elderly remains a major challenge. We believe that with its strong focus on a both systematic and realistic fall prevention strategy adapted to primary care setting PreFalls will be a valuable addition to the scientific literature in the field.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01032252">NCT01032252</a></p

Anthroposophic therapy for chronic depression: a four-year prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Depressive disorders are common, cause considerable disability, and do not always respond to standard therapy (psychotherapy, antidepressants). Anthroposophic treatment for depression differs from ordinary treatment in the use of artistic and physical therapies and special medication. We studied clinical outcomes of anthroposophic therapy for depression. METHODS: 97 outpatients from 42 medical practices in Germany participated in a prospective cohort study. Patients were aged 20–69 years and were referred to anthroposophic therapies (art, eurythmy movement exercises, or rhythmical massage) or started physician-provided anthroposophic therapy (counselling, medication) for depression: depressed mood, at least two of six further depressive symptoms, minimum duration six months, Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, German version (CES-D, range 0–60 points) of at least 24 points. Outcomes were CES-D (primary outcome) and SF-36 after 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 48 months. Data were collected from July 1998 to March 2005. RESULTS: Median number of art/eurythmy/massage sessions was 14 (interquartile range 12–22), median therapy duration was 137 (91–212) days. All outcomes improved significantly between baseline and all subsequent follow-ups. Improvements from baseline to 12 months were: CES-D from mean (standard deviation) 34.77 (8.21) to 19.55 (13.12) (p < 0.001), SF-36 Mental Component Summary from 26.11 (7.98) to 39.15 (12.08) (p < 0.001), and SF-36 Physical Component Summary from 43.78 (9.46) to 48.79 (9.00) (p < 0.001). All these improvements were maintained until last follow-up. At 12-month follow-up and later, 52%–56% of evaluable patients (35%–42% of all patients) were improved by at least 50% of baseline CES-D scores. CES-D improved similarly in patients not using antidepressants or psychotherapy during the first six study months (55% of patients). CONCLUSION: In outpatients with chronic depression, anthroposophic therapies were followed by long-term clinical improvement. Although the pre-post design of the present study does not allow for conclusions about comparative effectiveness, study findings suggest that the anthroposophic approach, with its recourse to non-verbal and artistic exercising therapies can be useful for patients motivated for such therapies