Interventions, Participative Role, Barriers, and Facilitators for Involvement in eHealth Communication for People Undergoing Hemodialysis: Protocol for a Scoping Review

publishedVersio

Hvorfor holdes det fremdeles muntlige rapporter i helseinstitusjoner når helsepersonell har tilgang til elektronisk pasientjournal? En kvalitativ studie

Background: Oral shift report has a long tradition in the health service. Electronic health record documentation is available, it is argued that written information can replace the oral transmission of patient information. Health institutions have replaced oral shift reports with “silent reporting”. Aim: To develop knowledge about which topics healthcare professionals talked about during shift reports. Method: Qualitative approach, analyzed by Krippendorff's content analysis. Nursing students sampled data from oral shift reports. Result: Organizational conditions, care and treatment were most discussed. Professional conditions, staff matters, and frustration were often discussed. Private talk occupied a small part of the shift reports. Conclusion: The shift reports contain more than an exchange of patient information and must receive greater focus while the development of electronic health records (EHR) is ongoing. Streamlining the health service, without an impact assessment of a reduction of oral shift reports, can lead to a deterioration in the quality of the nursing service and patient safety. The nurses' organizational activities can be disguised in the term report.Bakgrunn: Muntlig rapport har lang tradisjon i helsetjenesten. Elektronisk journaldokumentasjon er tilgjengelig, og det argumenteres for at skriftlig informasjon kan erstatte den muntlige overleveringen av pasientinformasjon. Noen steder er muntlig rapport erstattet med stille rapport for å spare tid og ressurser. Hensikt: Hensikten er å utvikle kunnskap om hvilke tema helsepersonell snakker om under rapportmøter i helsetjenesten. Metode: Kvalitativ tilnærming, Krippendorffs innholdsanalyse. Sykepleierstudenter samlet data fra rapportmøter i sykehus, sykehjem og hjemmetjeneste. Resultat: Organisatoriske forhold og drift, pleie og behandling ble mest omtalt. Faglige forhold og personalets bekymring og frustrasjon ble ofte omtalt. Privat prat opptok liten del av rapportmøtene. Konklusjon: Rapportmøtene inneholder mer enn formidling av pasientopplysninger, og må få større fokus mens videreutvikling av elektronisk pasientjournal (EPJ) pågår. Effektivisering av helsetjenesten, uten konsekvensutredning av reduksjon i rapport-tiden, kan medføre kvalitetsforringelse av sykepleietjenesten og pasientsikkerheten. Sykepleiernes organiseringsvirksomhet kan kamufleres i begrepet rapport

Use of immobilized cryopreserved bovine semen in a blind artificial insemination trial

AbstractTo make timing of artificial insemination (AI) relative to ovulation less critical, methods for prolonging shelf life of spermatozoa in vivo after AI have been attempted to be developed. Encapsulation of sperm cells is a documented technology, and recently, a technology in which sperm cells are embedded in alginate gel has been introduced and commercialized. In this study, standard processed semen with the Biladyl extender (control) was compared with semen processed by sperm immobilization technology developed by SpermVital AS in a blind field trial. Moreover, in vitro acrosome and plasma membrane integrity was assessed and compared with AI fertility data for possible correlation. Semen from 16 Norwegian Red young bulls with unknown fertility was collected and processed after splitting the semen in two aliquots. These aliquots were processed with the standard Biladyl extender or the SpermVital extender to a final number of 12 × 106 and 25 × 106 spermatozoa/dose, respectively. In total, 2000 semen doses were produced from each bull, divided equally by treatment. Artificial insemination doses were set up to design a blinded AI regime; 5 + 5 straws from each extender within ejaculates in ten-straw goblets were distributed to AI technicians and veterinarians all over Norway. Outcomes of the inseminations were measured as 56-day nonreturn rate (NRR). Postthaw sperm quality was assessed by flow cytometry using propidium iodide and Alexa 488–conjugated peanut agglutinin to assess the proportion of plasma membrane and acrosome-intact sperm cells, respectively. In total, data from 14,125 first inseminations performed over a 12-month period, 7081 with Biladyl and 7044 with SpermVital semen, were used in the statistical analyses. There was no significant difference in 56-day NRR for the two semen categories, overall NRR being 72.5% and 72.7% for Biladyl and SpermVital, respectively. The flow cytometric results revealed a significant higher level of acrosome-intact live spermatozoa in Biladyl-processed semen compared to SpermVital semen. The results indicate that the level of acrosome-intact live spermatozoa in the AI dose did not affect the 56-day NRR for the two semen processing methods. In conclusion, this study has showed that immobilized spermatozoa provide equal fertility results as standard processed semen when AI is performed in a blinded field trial, although the immobilization procedure caused increased sperm damage evaluated in vitro compared to standard semen processing procedure

Interventions, Participative Role, Barriers, and Facilitators for Involvement in eHealth Communication for People Undergoing Hemodialysis : Protocol for a Scoping Review

BACKGROUND: eHealth interventions have been shown to offer people living with chronic kidney disease the opportunity of embracing dialysis therapies with greater confidence, the potential to obtain better clinical outcomes and increased quality of life, and diverse and flexible designs and delivery options. eHealth interventions or solutions can offer one-way information without the possibility for dialogue, as with most mobile apps. eHealth interventions intending to enable two-way communication between patients undergoing hemodialysis and health professionals are the focus of this review. eHealth communication interventions that enable two-way communication between patients undergoing hemodialysis and health professionals is an emerging field, but issues relating to participation in eHealth communication for patients undergoing hemodialysis are scarcely described. The current conceptualization of this issue is too scattered to inform the development of future interventions. In this scoping review, we want to assemble and examine this scattered knowledge on participation in two-way eHealth communication for patients undergoing hemodialysis. OBJECTIVE: We want to understand the participative role of people living with chronic kidney disease undergoing hemodialysis in available communicative eHealth interventions and to understand which barriers and facilitators exist for patient involvement in eHealth communication with health professionals. METHODS: A scoping review methodology is guiding this study. Peer-reviewed primary studies, including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods study designs will be included. A systematic search for published studies, dissertations, and theses at the doctoral level in the English language will be conducted in five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses). The included literature will focus on adult (18 years or older) patients undergoing hemodialysis who are involved in eHealth communication with health professionals. Data on the type of eHealth communication interventions, the participative role, and barriers and facilitators for the involvement in eHealth communication for people undergoing hemodialysis will be extracted independently by two reviewers. The extracted data will be collected in a draft charting table prepared for the study. Any discrepancies between the reviewers will be solved through discussion or with a third reviewer. RESULTS: Results are anticipated by the spring of 2023 and will be presented in tabular format along with a narrative summary. The anticipated results will be presented in alignment with the objectives of the study, presenting findings on the participative role of patients undergoing hemodialysis in eHealth communication interventions. CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that this study will inform on eHealth communication interventions and the level of patient participation in eHealth communication for patients undergoing hemodialysis. The systematized overview will possibly identify research gaps and motivate further development of eHealth communication to ensure patient participation. The findings will be of interest to key stakeholders in clinical care, research, development, policy, and patient advocacy. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/3861