What is the impact of shift work on the psychological functioning and resilience of nurses? An integrative review

Aim: To synthesize existing research to determine if nurses who work shifts have poorer psychological functioning and resilience than nurses who do not work shifts. Background: Research exploring the impact of shift work on the psychological functioning and resilience of nurses is limited compared with research investigating the impact of shifts on physical outcomes. Design: Integrative literature review. Data Sources: Relevant databases were searched from January 1995-August 2016 using the combination of keywords: nurse, shift work; rotating roster; night shift; resilient; hardiness; coping; well-being; burnout; mental health; occupational stress; compassion fatigue; compassion satisfaction; stress; anxiety; depression. Review Methods: Two authors independently performed the integrative review processes proposed by Whittemore and Knafl and a quality assessment using the mixed-methods appraisal tool by Pluye et al. Results: A total of 37 articles were included in the review (32 quantitative, 4 qualitative and 1 mixed-methods). Approximately half of the studies directly compared nurse shift workers with non-shift workers. Findings were grouped according to the following main outcomes: (1) general psychological well-being/quality of life; (2) Job satisfaction/burnout; (3) Depression, anxiety and stress; and (4) Resilience/coping. We did not find definitive evidence that shift work is associated with poorer psychological functioning in nurses. Overall, the findings suggest that the impact of shift work on nurse psychological functioning is dependent on several contextual and individual factors. Conclusion: More studies are required which directly compare the psychological outcomes and resilience of nurse shift workers with non-shift workers

Neglected Tropical Diseases of the Middle East and North Africa: Review of Their Prevalence, Distribution, and Opportunities for Control

The neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) are highly endemic but patchily distributed among the 20 countries and almost 400 million people of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, and disproportionately affect an estimated 65 million people living on less than US$2 per day. Egypt has the largest number of people living in poverty of any MENA nation, while Yemen has the highest prevalence of people living in poverty. These two nations stand out for having suffered the highest rates of many NTDs, including the soil-transmitted nematode infections, filarial infections, schistosomiasis, fascioliasis, leprosy, and trachoma, although they should be recognized for recent measures aimed at NTD control. Leishmaniasis, especially cutaneous leishmaniasis, is endemic in Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Morocco, and elsewhere in the region. Both zoonotic (Leishmania major) and anthroponotic (Leishmania tropica) forms are endemic in MENA in rural arid regions and urban regions, respectively. Other endemic zoonotic NTDs include cystic echinococcosis, fascioliasis, and brucellosis. Dengue is endemic in Saudi Arabia, where Rift Valley fever and Alkhurma hemorrhagic fever have also emerged. Great strides have been made towards elimination of several endemic NTDs, including lymphatic filariasis in Egypt and Yemen; schistosomiasis in Iran, Morocco, and Oman; and trachoma in Morocco, Algeria, Iran, Libya, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and the United Arab Emirates. A particularly noteworthy achievement is the long battle waged against schistosomiasis in Egypt, where prevalence has been brought down by regular praziquantel treatment. Conflict and human and animal migrations are key social determinants in preventing the control or elimination of NTDs in the MENA, while local political will, strengthened international and intersectoral cooperative efforts for surveillance, mass drug administration, and vaccination are essential for elimination

Prevalence and causes of visual impairment in a Brazilian population: The Botucatu Eye Study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This paper reports population-based data on the prevalence and causes of visual impairment among children and adults in Botucatu, Brazil.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted involving a random start point and then systematic sampling of an urban Brazilian population in the city of Botucatu. There were approximately 3 300 individuals aged 1 to 91 years who were eligible to participate in the study. Of this sample, 2485 (75.3%) underwent ophthalmic examination. The ophthalmic examination included uncorrected (presenting) and best corrected distance visual acuity using standardized protocols. The primary cause of decreased visual acuity was identified for all patients with visual impairment.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Presenting low vision and presenting blindness were found in 5.2% (95% CI: 4.3–6.1) and 2.2% (95% CI: 1.6–2.8) of the population, respectively. Unilateral presenting low vision and unilateral presenting blindness were found in 8.3% (95% CI: 7.2–9.5) and 3.7% (95% CI: 2.9–4.4) of the population respectively. Best corrected low vision was found in 1.3% of the population (95% CI: 0.9–1.7) and best corrected blindness was discovered in 0.4% of people (95% CI: 0.2–0.7). The main cause of presenting low vision was refractive error (72.3%) and cataract was the most prevalent cause of blindness (50%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The main causes of low vision and blindness in this Brazilian city were uncorrected refractive errors, cataract, and retinal diseases. Programs to further reduce the burden of visual impairment need to be targeted toward the correction of refractive error and surgery for cataracts.</p