METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the EFFORT Protein trial, we investigated the effect of high versus usual protein dose (≥ 2.2 vs. ≤ 1.2 g/kg body weight/day) on time-to-discharge alive from the hospital (TTDA) and 60-day mortality and in different subgroups in critically ill patients with AKI as defined by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria within 7 days of ICU admission. The associations of protein dose with incidence and duration of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) were also investigated.
RESULTS: Of the 1329 randomized patients, 312 developed AKI and were included in this analysis (163 in the high and 149 in the usual protein dose group). High protein was associated with a slower time-to-discharge alive from the hospital (TTDA) (hazard ratio 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.8) and higher 60-day mortality (relative risk 1.4 (95% CI 1.1-1.8). Effect modification was not statistically significant for any subgroup, and no subgroups suggested a beneficial effect of higher protein, although the harmful effect of higher protein target appeared to disappear in patients who received kidney replacement therapy (KRT). Protein dose was not significantly associated with the incidence of AKI and KRT or duration of KRT.
CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with AKI, high protein may be associated with worse outcomes in all AKI stages. Recommendation of higher protein dosing in AKI patients should be carefully re-evaluated to avoid potential harmful effects especially in patients who were not treated with KRT.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03160547) on May 17th 2017.
METHODS: A group of healthcare university students completed the RSES across three waves: baseline, 1-week follow-up, and 15-week follow-up. A total of 481 valid responses were collected through the three-wave data collection process. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the baseline data to explore the potential factorial structure, while confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed on the follow-up data to determine the best-fit model. Additionally, the cross-sectional and longitudinal measurement invariances were tested to assess the measurement properties of the RSES for different groups, such as gender and age, as well as across different time points. Convergent validity was assessed against the Self-Rated Health Questionnaire (SRHQ) using Spearman's correlation. Internal consistency was examined using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients, while test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient.
RESULTS: The results of EFA revealed that Items 5, 8, and 9 had inadequate or cross-factor loadings, leading to their removal from further analysis. Analysis of the remaining seven items using EFA suggested a two-factor solution. A comparison of several potential models for the 10-item and 7-item RSES using CFA showed a preference for the 7-item form (RSES-7) with two factors. Furthermore, the RSES-7 exhibited strict invariance across different groups and time points, indicating its stability and consistency. The RSES-7 also demonstrated adequate convergent validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability, which further supported its robustness as a measure of self-esteem.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the RSES-7 is a psychometrically sound and brief self-report scale for measuring self-esteem in the Chinese context. More studies are warranted to further verify its usability.
METHOD: This was a descriptive cross-sectional design study. Data were collected from 25 to 31 December 2022, at six hospitals in Sichuan province. Using convenience sampling, a total of 717 participants were recruited, using the revised version of the Maslach Burnout InventoryGeneral Survey, and the Resilience Assessment Scale for healthcare workers.
RESULTS: More than half of nurses reported a moderate level of emotional exhaustion (66.50%, n = 484), cynicism (68.20%, n = 489), and personal accomplishment (68.76%, n = 493); nearly one-third and one-fourth of nurses experienced a high level of emotional exhaustion (27.48%, n = 197) and cynicism (20.78%, n = 149), respectively. In resilience, the highest scoring dimension was interpersonal connectedness, followed by decisional coping, flexible self-adaptation, and rational thinking. Satisfaction with work income, patient-nurse conflict, frequency of overtime work, age, and marital status were significant factors influencing burnout among nurses (p < .05).
CONCLUSION: The findings of the study enlighten nursing administrators on the level of burnout and resilience and associated factors among nurses during the peak of coronavirus disease 2019 infection in China. This would be of immense help in planning a welfare program to support the nurses.