16 research outputs found
Health professionalsâ attitudes toward religiosity and spirituality: a NERSH Data Pool based on 23 surveys from six continents [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
Background
In order to facilitate better international and cross-cultural comparisons of health professionals (HPs) attitudes towards Religiosity and/or Spirituality (R/S) using individual participant data meta-analysis we updated the NERSH Data Pool.
Methods
We performed both a network search, a citation search and systematic literature searches to find new surveys.
Results
We found six new surveys (N=1,068), and the complete data pool ended up comprising 7,323 observations, including 4,070 females and 3,253 males. Most physicians (83%, N=3,700) believed that R/S had âsomeâ influence on their patientsâ health (CI95%) (81.8%â84.2%). Similarly, nurses (94%, N=1,020) shared such a belief (92.5%â95.5%). Across all samples 649 (16%; 14.9%â17.1%) physicians reported to have undergone formal R/S-training, compared with nurses where this was 264 (23%; 20.6%â25.4%).
Conclusions
Preliminary analysis indicates that HPs believe R/S to be important for patient health but lack formal R/S-training. Findings are discussed. We find the data pool suitable as a base for future cross-cultural comparisons using individual participant data meta-analysis
The International NERSH Data Pool-A Methodological Description of a Data Pool of Religious and Spiritual Values of Health Professionals from Six Continents
Collaboration within the recently established Network for Research on Spirituality and Health (NERSH) has made it possible to pool data from 14 different surveys from six continents. All surveys are largely based on the questionnaire by Curlin " Religion and Spirituality in Medicine, Perspectives of Physicians" (RSMPP). This article is a methodological description of the process of building the International NERSH Data Pool. The larger contours of the data are described using frequency statistics. Five subscales in the data pool (including the already established DUREL scale) were tested using Cronbach's alpha and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) in an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). 5724 individuals were included, of which 57% were female and the mean age was 41.5 years with a 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from 41.2 to 41.8. Most respondents were physicians (n = 3883), nurses (n = 1189), and midwives (n = 286);but also psychologists (n = 50), therapists (n = 44), chaplains (n = 5), and students (n = 10) were included. The DUREL scale was assessed with Cronbach's alpha (ff = 0.92) and PCA confirmed its reliability and unidimensionality. The new scales covering the dimensions of "Religiosity of Health Professionals (HPs)" (alpha = 0.89), "Willingness of Physicians to Interact with Patients Regarding R/S Issues" (alpha = 0.79), "Religious Objections to Controversial Issues in Medicine" (alpha = 0.78), and "R/S as a Calling" (alpha = 0.82), also proved unidimensional in the PCAs. We argue that the proposed scales are relevant and reliable measures of religious dimensions within the data pool. Finally, we outline future studies already planned based on the data pool, and invite interested researchers to join the NERSH collaboration
The prevalence extent of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) use among Saudis
Introduction: There is worldwide interest in the use of CAM. Studying CAM in Saudi population is important as it will reflect the influence of psychosocial, cultural and religious factors on health beliefs and behaviors. The objective of this study was to present an updated review on the use of CAM practices in Saudi Arabia including commonly used types, common conditions for which it has been used and who uses CAM. Methods: This review used data from national surveys conducted in Saudi Arabia and published between 2000 and 2015. The literature search was performed considering standards adopted such as Moose guidelines for observational studies. Two authors independently reviewed each article. The search yielded 73 articles, and a total of 36 articles were included. Further careful data extraction was carried out by two independents reviewers. Results: Most of the reviewed studies were cross-sectional in design and were published between 2014 and 2015, and mostly in Riyadh region. Substantial difference in the findings for the patterns of CAM use was revealed. The most commonly employed practice was of spiritual type such as prayer and reciting Quran alone or on water. Other types include herbs (8â76%), honey (14â73%) and dietary products (6â82%). Cupping (Alhijamah) was least used (4â45%). Acupuncture was more practiced among professionals. Conclusion: The utilization of CAM is widely practiced in Saudi Arabia. There is need for efforts to promote research in the field of CAM to address each practice individually. Population surveys should be encouraged supported by mass media to raise knowledge and awareness about the practice of different CAM modalities. The national center of CAM should play a major role in these efforts
A systematic review of recent clinical practice guidelines on the diagnosis, assessment and management of hypertension.
BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), optimal hypertension control is not achieved in many parts of the world; one of the challenges is the volume of guidelines on this topic and their variable quality. To systematically review the quality, methodology, and consistency of recommendations of recently-developed national CPGs on the diagnosis, assessment and the management of hypertension. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, guidelines' websites and Google were searched for CPGs written in English on the general management of hypertension in any clinical setting published between January 2006 and September 2011. Four raters independently appraised each CPG using the AGREE-II instrument and 2 reviewers independently extracted the data. Conflicts were resolved by discussion or the involvement of an additional reviewer. Eleven CPGs were identified. The overall quality ranged from 2.5 to 6 out of 7 on the AGREE-II tool. The highest scores were for "clarity of presentation" (44.4%-88.9%) and the lowest were for "rigour of development" (8.3%-30% for 9 CGPs). None of them clearly reported being newly developed or adapted. Only one reported having a patient representative in its development team. Systematic reviews were not consistently used and only 2 up-to-date Cochrane reviews were cited. Two CPGs graded some recommendations and related that to levels (but not quality) of evidence. The CPGs' recommendations on assessment and non-pharmacological management were fairly consistent. Guidelines varied in the selection of first-line treatment, adjustment of therapy and drug combinations. Important specific aspects of care (e.g. resistant hypertension) were ignored by 6/11 CPGs. The CPGs varied in methodological quality, suggesting that their implementation might not result in less variation of care or in better health-related outcomes. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: More efforts are needed to promote the realistic approach of localization or local adaptation of existing high-quality CPGs to the national context
Characteristics and Methods Used For Developing the 11 Clinical Practice Guidelines.
<p>NR: Not reported. SOA: South Africa; IND: India; POL: Poland; MAL: Malaysia; EUR: Europe; JAP: Japan; LAT: Latin America; AUS: Australia; CAN: Canada, SAU: Saudi Arabia and NICE (The UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence).</p>*<p>The ESH Reappraisal in 2009 cited only 1 review (4 reviews were cited in 2007).</p>**<p>Produced by the Hypertension Cochrane Review Group calculated for up to one year before the date of publication of the CPGs when the search date was not reported.</p>***<p>The total number of reviews available at that time was 41 but two reviews were excluded because they were judged as irrelevant.</p>****<p>The updated version of Murlow's review was published in 2008 but the 2000 version was the one cited.</p
Recommendations from Clinical Practice Guidelines About Diagnosis and Assessment of Patients with Hypertension.
<p>NR: Not reported, â: Recommended, Ă: Not Recommended; SOA: South Africa; IND: India; POL: Poland; MAL: Malaysia; EUR: Europe; JAP: Japan; LAT: Latin America; AUS: Australia; CAN: Canada; SAU: Saudi Arabia and NICE (The UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence).</p>$<p>not endorsed by NICE. ABI: ankle-brachial index ECD: Echo Carotid Doppler, RAU: Renal artery duplex ultrasound.</p
The NERSH International Collaboration on Values, Spirituality and Religion in Medicine: Development of Questionnaire, Description of Data Pool, and Overview of Pool Publications
Modern healthcare research has only in recent years investigated the impact of health care workers' religious and other moral values on medical practice, interaction with patients, and ethically complex decision-making. Thus far, no international data exist on the way such values vary across different countries. We therefore established the NERSH International Collaboration on Values in Medicine with datasets on physician religious characteristics and values based on the same survey instrument. The present article provides (a) an overview of the development of the original and optimized survey instruments, (b) an overview of the content of the NERSH data pool at this stage and (c) a brief review of insights gained from articles published with the questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed in 2002, after extensive pretesting in the United States and subsequently translated from English into other languages using forward-backward translations with Face Validations. In 2013, representatives of several national research groups came together and worked at optimizing the survey instrument for future use on the basis of the existing datasets. Research groups were identified through personal contacts with researchers requesting to use the instrument, as well as through two literature searches. Data were assembled in Stata and synchronized for their comparability using a matched intersection design based on the items in the original questionnaire. With a few optimizations and added modules appropriate for cultures more secular than that of the United States, the survey instrument holds promise as a tool for future comparative analyses. The pool at this stage consists of data from eleven studies conducted by research teams in nine different countries over six continents with responses from more than 6000 health professionals. Inspection of data between groups suggests large differences in religious and other moral values across nations and cultures, and that these values account for differences in health professional's clinical practices
Quality of the 11 Hypertension Clinical Practice Guidelines for the six domains of the AGREE-II Instrument (D1âD6) and the Overall Impression of the 4 Assessors.
<p>D1 : Scope & purpose, D2: Stakeholder involvement, D3: Rigor of involvement, D4: Clarity of presentation, D5: Applicability, D6: editorial independence.</p><p>All the 23 items of the AGREE-II instrument are rated on a 7-point scale where a score of 1 is given when there is no information that is relevant to the item or if the concept is very poorly reported; a score of 7 is given if the quality of reporting is exceptional and where the full criteria and considerations articulated in the AGREE-II User's Manual have been met; and a score between 2 and 6 is assigned when the reporting of the AGREE II item does not meet the full criteria or considerations. Scores increase as more criteria are met and considerations addressed. In other words, the higher the score, the better the quality of the CPG item.</p><p>SOA: South Africa; IND: India; POL: Poland; MAL: Malaysia; EUR: Europe; JAP: Japan; LAT: Latin America; AUS: Australia; CAN: Canada; SAU: Saudi Arabia and NICE: UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence).</p>*<p>Although the scoring is done in integers, the numbers in this column represent the averages of the scoring done by 4 assessors.</p>**<p>Risk of bias: +++ high, ++ intermediate, + low.</p>***<p>This is based on the subjective assessment made individually by each of the 4 assessors in response to: âDo you recommend this CPG for use?â</p
Domain Scores (%) for the 11 Clinical Practice Guidelines Using the AGREE-II Instrument.
<p>SOA: South Africa; IND: India; POL: Poland; MAL: Malaysia; EUR: Europe; JAP: Japan; LAT: Latin America; AUS: Australia; CAN: Canada; SAU: Saudi Arabia and NICE: UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.</p
Recommendations from Clinical Practice Guidelines about Managing Patients with Hypertension.
<p>SOA: South Africa; IND: India; POL: Poland; MAL: Malaysia; EUR: Europe; JAP: Japan; LAT: Latin America; AUS: Australia; CAN: Canada and SAU: Saudi Arabia and NICE (The UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence). NR: not reported. A: angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), C: calcium channel blocker (CCB), D: Diuretic.</p>1<p>And if SBP>150 and or DBP>95- treat.</p>2<p>If the SBP> or â=â140 mm Hg or DBP> or â=â90 mm Hg across 5 visits.</p>3<p>if SBPâ=â120â159 mmHg AND/OR DBPâ=â80â99 mmHg.</p>4<p>If, at visit 2 within one month, SBP is > or â=â140 mm Hg and/or DBP is > or â=â90 mm Hg.</p>5<p>If SBPâ=â120â159 mmHg AND/OR DBPâ=â80â99 mmHg with high risk or if SBP 160 mmHg AND/OR DBP 100 mmHg regardless of risk.</p>6<p>NICE CPG favored A for those below 55 years and C, D, for those aged 55 years or older and for black patients.</p>7<p>Yes if SBP>10 mmHg above target.</p>8<p>Recommended in at least certain high risk groups.</p>9<p>Recommended for those with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis only.</p>10<p>No target level stated.</p>11<p>A1c<6.5 mmol/L.</p>12<p>A1c between 6.5â7% in patients with HTN, DM and nephropathy.</p>13<p>Referred to previous guideline version.</p>14<p>Every 3â6 months;</p>15<p>Every 3 months for high risk patients and every 6 months for low risk patients;</p>16<p>Every 3 months for the first year then 6-monthly thereafter;</p>17<p>Once a year.</p>18<p>For pheochromocytoma cases only.</p