Data_Sheet_1_Role cognition of assigned nurses supporting Hubei Province in the fight against COVID-19 in China: a hermeneutic phenomenological study.docx

AimsDuring the COVID-19 epidemic, nurses played a crucial role in clinical treatment. As a special group, front-line nurses, especially those assigned to support Hubei Province in the fight against COVID-19 between February and April 2020, brought diverse experiences from different provinces in China in taking care of COVID-19 patients and role cognition. Therefore, our purpose is to explore the real coping experience and role cognition of front-line nurses during the novel coronavirus outbreak to provide relevant experience references for society and managers in the face of such major public health emergencies in the future.DesignThis qualitative study was performed using the phenomenological hermeneutics method.MethodThis is a qualitative phenomenological study. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were used to collect data. The interviewees were 53 front-line nurses who assisted and supported the fight against COVID-19 in Hubei Province during the COVID-19 epidemic. Data were collected through individual online and telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview during March 2020. The COREQ guidance was used to report this study.ResultsThe findings revealed that front-line nurses assisting in the fight against COVID-19 developed a context-specific role cognition of their work and contribution to society. The qualitative analysis of the data revealed 15 sub-categories and 5 main categories. These five themes represented the different roles identified by nurses. The roles included expectations, conflicts, adaptation, emotions, and flow of blessing. Belief in getting better, a sense of honor, and training could help them to reduce feelings of conflict in this role and adapt more quickly.DiscussionThis article discusses the real coping experience and role cognition of front-line nurses during the novel coronavirus epidemic. It provides relevant experience references for society and managers to face similar major public health emergencies in the future. This study makes a significant contribution to the literature because it demonstrates how non-local nurses sent to Hubei to work perceived their roles as part of a larger narrative of patriotism, duty, solidarity, and hope.</p

Additional file 1 of Current status and influencing factors of spiritual needs of patients with advanced cancer: a cross-sectional study

Additional file 1. Raw Data-Spiritual Needs of Patients with Advanced Cancer

Presentation_1_Comparing the application of three thrombosis risk assessment models in patients with acute poisoning: A cross-sectional survey.pdf

BackgroundPatients with acute toxic hemoperfusion are prone to deep vein thrombosis. However, there is no risk assessment model for thrombosis in patients with acute toxic hemoperfusion. Therefore, we compared three commonly used risk assessment models for deep vein thrombosis to determine the model most suitable for assessment of deep vein thrombosis in patients with acute toxic hemoperfusion.MethodsCaprini, Autar, and Padua thrombosis risk assessment models were used to assess the risk of deep vein thrombosis in patients with acute poisoning and hemoperfusion admitted to a grade A hospital in Shandong province from October 2017 to February 2019. The predictive values of the three models were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.ResultsThe risk assessment model scores of Caprini, Autar, and Padua were 7.55 ± 1.76, 8.63 ± 2.36, and 3.92 ± 0.55, respectively. The Caprini risk assessment model was significantly different (p 0.05). The areas under the ROC curve of the Caprini, Autar, and Padua risk assessment models were 0.673, 0.585, and 0.535, respectively. The difference in areas under the ROC curve between the Caprini risk assessment model and the Autar risk assessment model as well as the Padua risk assessment model was significant (p 0.05). The Caprini risk assessment model had a sensitivity of 91.9%, specificity of 33.1%, and a Youden index of 0.249. The sensitivity and specificity of Autar’s risk assessment model were 37.0 and 77.2%, respectively, and the Youden index was 0.141. The Padua risk assessment model had a sensitivity of 91.3%, specificity of 15.0%, and a Youden index of 0.063.ConclusionThe three thrombosis risk assessment models were not suitable for patients with acute poisoning and hemoperfusion.</p