Παράγοντες που επηρεάζουν την λήψη της απόφασης έναρξης και διακοπής της καρδιοαναπνευστικής αναζωογόνησης σε επαγγελματίες υγείας

Η καρδιακή ανακοπή είναι μια επείγουσα ιατρική κατάσταση, που σε ορισμένες περιπτώσεις, είναι δυνητικά αναστρέψιμη, αν αντιμετωπιστεί έγκαιρα. Η θεραπεία για την καρδιακή ανακοπή είναι η άμεση απινίδωση, ενώ η καρδιοπνευμονική ανάνηψη (ΚΑΡΠΑ) χρησιμοποιείται για να παρέχει κυκλοφορική υποστήριξη ή και να προκαλέσει επαρκή σφυγμό. Συνιστάται ότι θα πρέπει να ξεκινήσει άμεσα και να διακόπτεται όσο το δυνατό λιγότερο. Η καρδιοπνευμονική ανάνηψη αποτελείται από τη χρήση θωρακικών συμπιέσεων και τεχνητού αερισμού για τη διατήρηση της κυκλοφορικής ροής και την οξυγόνωση κατά τη διάρκεια της καρδιακής ανακοπής. Αν και τα ποσοστά επιβίωσης και τα νευρολογικά αποτελέσματα είναι φτωχά για τους ασθενείς με καρδιακή ανακοπή, η έγκαιρη και κατάλληλη εφαρμογή ανάνηψης, με τη συμμετοχή πρώιμης απινίδωσης, μπορεί να οδηγήσει σε βελτιωμένα ποσοστά επιβίωσης. Σκοπός της παρούσας μελέτης ήταν η διερεύνηση των παραγόντων και των απόψεων που επηρεάζουν τη λήψη απόφασης έναρξης ή διακοπής της καρδιοπνευμονικής αναζωογόνησης από τους επαγγελματίες υγείας. Καταγράφησαν επίσης οι διαφορές στη στάση του ιατρικού και παραϊατρικού προσωπικού σε σχέση με τον τερματισμό της ΚΑΡΠΑ. Σύμφωνα με τα αποτελέσματα της έρευνας ο κύριος λόγος διακοπής της ΚΑΡΠΑ είναι ο κοινωνικός και προέρχεται από το άμεσο οικογενειακό περιβάλλον, οι λοιπές ιατρικές καταστάσεις που δεν επιτρέπουν την εκκίνηση της ΚΑΡΠΑ ή συστήνουν την άμεση διακοπή της καθώς και η ύπαρξη προκαταβολικών οδηγιών παύσης, εκ μέρους του ασθενούς. Η ανάγκη κοινής και εξειδικευμένης εκπαίδευσης των μελών της ομάδας αναζωογόνησης κρίθηκε απαιτητή και αναδείχθηκε ως σημαντικός παράγοντας στην εκτέλεση της ΚΑΡΠΑ

Translation, Adaptation and Validation of the Coronary Revascularization Outcome Questionnaire (CROQ) into Greek

Date of Acceptance: 31/05/2015Evaluating the impact of coronary revascularization on patients’ health related quality of life with a patient-based and disease-specific tool is important for drawing conclusions about treatment and outcomes. This study reports on the translation, adaptation and psychometric evaluation of a Greek version of the Coronary Revascularization Outcome Questionnaire (CROQ-Gr)Peer reviewe

Comparative optimism about infection and recovery from COVID‐19; Implications for adherence with lockdown advice

Background Comparative optimism, the belief that negative events are more likely to happen to others rather than to oneself, is well established in health risk research. It is unknown, however, whether comparative optimism also permeates people’s health expectations and potentially behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objectives Data were collected through an international survey (N = 6485) exploring people’s thoughts and psychosocial behaviours relating to COVID‐19. This paper reports UK data on comparative optimism. In particular, we examine the belief that negative events surrounding risk and recovery from COVID-19 are perceived as more likely to happen to others rather than to oneself. Methods Using online snowball sampling through social media, anonymous UK survey data were collected from N = 645 adults during weeks 5-8 of the UK COVID-19 lockdown. The sample was normally distributed in terms of age and reflected the UK ethnic and disability profile. Findings Respondents demonstrated comparative optimism where they believed that as compared to others of the same age and gender, they were unlikely to experience a range of controllable (eg accidentally infect/ be infected) and uncontrollable (eg need hospitalization/ intensive care treatment if infected) COVID-19-related risks in the short term (P < .001). They were comparatively pessimistic (ie thinking they were more at risk than others for developing COVID-19-related infection or symptoms) when thinking about the next year. Discussion This is one of the first ever studies to report compelling comparative biases in UK adults’ thinking about COVID-19

Behavioural self-blame in chronic illness: A study of predictors and consequences.

This thesis examined the relationship of behavioural self-blame and psychological adjustment to chronic illness and addressed some of the conceptual and methodological inconsistencies found in the existing literature on self-blame by studying different groups of chronically ill patients. Study One comprised a questionnaire study and was designed to mainly examine 1) differences in the levels of self-blame in three different patient groups (i.e. diabetes, heart disease and breast cancer patients), 2) the relationship between perceptions of behavioural risk factors contributing to the patients' illness and level of self-blame and 3) the relationship between self-blame, self-efficacy and psychological adjustment. Findings showed that there are significant differences in the levels of self-blame across the three groups with breast cancer patients showing the least self-blame. These differences were explained in terms of the different levels of perceived lifestyle factors contributing to the cause of illness and its subsequent management in the three groups. Also, self-blame was higher when patients were asked to consider a specific negative event relevant to their illness than when they considered their illness in general. For all three groups, self-blame was correlated to the number of behavioural risk factors patients reported as having contributed to their illness. No relationship was found between self-blame and self-efficacy or psychological adjustment. Study Two looked at the predictors of behavioural self-blame in heart disease patients by testing a theoretical model derived from evidence in the literature. The model included certain person (i.e. gender, age, characterological self-blame, and prior risk) and illness- related characteristics (i.e. type of diagnosis, time since diagnosis, perceived illness consequences, controllability of health behaviours) that had either direct paths to behavioural self-blame or indirect paths through their effect on behavioural causal attributions. The final model -showing gender and characterological self-blame as having both direct and indirect paths to self-blame, and prior risk, diagnosis and consequences as having only indirect paths- fit the data well. Also, behavioural attributions predicted improved health behaviour after the illness. No relationship between behavioural self-blame or causal attributions and psychological adjustment was found. Studies Three and Four addressed criticisms regarding the inconsistent conceptualisation and operation definitions of self-blame, which caution against unfounded generalisations such as the interchangeable use of the terms causality, responsibility and blame or the generalisation of results across different populations. This was done by 1) examining the degree to which self-blame is contingent upon the actual experience of illness, and 2) by comparing 14 negative events rated on dimensions relevant to blame and controllability. Specifically, in Study Three, non-patients were compared to patient counterparts from the previous study to look at differences in levels of self-blame for heart disease. Non-patients were found to have higher levels of self-blame than non-patients and showed no relationship between self-blame and behavioral risk suggesting a different understanding and utility of the concept. In Study Four, non-patients rated 14 negative events on the dimensions of blame, responsibility, control and avoidability. Two dimensional plots showed that while there were many similarities in the way the examined dimensions were applied to the 14 events, illnesses were represented separately from other negative events. Overall, these studies suggest a strong cognitive component in self-blaming patients as opposed to the motivational elements suggested in the literature. Possible explanations and ways to theoretically link the contradictory findings are discussed in the last chapter of the thesis and include the consideration of self-regulation processes and of changes that the self is subject to throughout the course of an illness

Behavioural self blame in chronic illness A study of predictors and consequences

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:DXN057616 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreSIGLEGBUnited Kingdo

A Codebook for Evaluating Peace Agreements

nrpages: 152status: publishe

Engaging families in health services research on childhood visual impairment: barriers to, and degree and nature of bias in, participation

Aim: To investigate the barriers to, and degree and nature of bias in, participation in health services research by parents of children with visual impairment. Methods: Parents of children newly diagnosed with ophthalmic disorders at Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, participated in a study to elicit their health service experiences and needs through a postal questionnaire survey followed by in-depth interviews. The participating and non-participating families were compared at different stages of recruitment, according to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Results: 20% (55) of all eligible families could not be invited to participate because of out of date contact details for either the family and/or family doctor in the hospital and/or community record systems. Completed questionnaires were received from 67% (147/221) of contacted families, although only 6% actively declined to take part. Compared to non-participating parents, those who took part were more likely to be white British, from higher socioeconomic groups, have English as their main language, and have no other visually impaired family members. There were no significant differences according to the clinical characteristics of their affected children. Conclusions: Families from socioeconomically deprived and ethnic minority groups are likely to be less visible than others in health services research on childhood visual impairment. Geographical mobility in families of young children with visual disability poses a potentially important obstacle to engaging them in research on their experiences of health services. These findings indicate the importance of addressing potential biases in the design and interpretation of future studies, to ensure equity in recommendations for policy and practice, and in implementation of services