METHOD: This research is a quasi-experimental design with a pre-post without control research approach. The research population covers all students registered joining OTOF CIPIPEC at Poltekkes Kemenkes Surakarta with a total number of 1061 of students. The samples are collected using a total sampling technique. The samples for this research are those registered joining the OTOF CIPIPEC at Poltekkes Kemenkes Surakarta meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria with a total number of 1031 of students. This research utilizes the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) questionnaires as its measuring instruments. This study was conducted in Mojosongo sub-district, Jebres district, Surakarta. This research involves 38 Community Units (In Indonesia known as Rukun Warga/RW) with a total number of 1066 of family heads and the Sibela Community Health Center. The data are analyzed using the Wilcoxon test and multiple linear regression test.
RESULT OF THE STUDY: The research results showed that there is a significant difference of readiness improvement, teamwork, and perception on other professions and satisfaction of the research subjects before and after joining OTOF-CIPIPEC (ρ<0.001). The average improvement scores of students' readiness, teamwork, perception, and satisfaction are 63.2%, 62.5%, 62.57%, and 113.04% respectively. The results of the multivariate analysis show that teamwork and perception significantly influence the students' readiness in their collaboration with the other professions (ρ<0.001) with the influence value of 0.93%.
CONCLUSION: This research concludes that OTOF-CIPIPEC implementation may improve readiness, teamwork, and perception of other professions and students' satisfaction in interprofessional education (IPE).
DESIGN AND METHODS: The respondents (n=30) were conveniently recruited within 10 kilometres radius of Kuantan city. The data were obtained using semi-guided administered questionnaires, which consists of four parts: socio-demographic data, lifestyle and clinical history (Part A); attitude and awareness on dietary practice regarding urolithiasis (Part B); food frequency questionnaire on urolithiasis (Part C) and level of knowledge on urolithiasis (Part D).
RESULTS: Majority of the respondents were women (70%), Malay (83.3%), mean age of 33.97 (±9.27), married (63.3%), completed higher education level (60%), working with government sector (33.3%) and have fixed monthly income (53.3%). Some of them had hypertension (n=4), diabetes (n=1), gout (n=1) and intestinal problem (n=1). Majority (80%) claimed having no family history of urolithiasis, consumed alcohol (10%), exercise with average frequency 2-3 times/week (46.7%) and heard about urolithiasis from healthcare worker (46.7%). The respondents' awareness about urolithiasis is considered to be good [81.23 (±9.98)] but having poor knowledge score [2.70 (±1.149)]. Majority preferred wholemeal bread, white rice, chicken meat, mackerel fish, chicken egg, apple, carrot, mustard leave and fresh milk in daily intake. Lesser plain water intake than standard requirement was noticed among respondents. Seasoning powder was commonly used for seasoning.
CONCLUSIONS: Generally, the general population of Kuantan, Pahang was aware of urolithiasis disease but needed more information on dietary aspect in terms of knowledge and food choice.
METHOD: The scientific information on COVID-19 was analysed by a literature search in MEDLINE, PubMed, the National and International Guidelines from the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Cochrane Library, and the internet.
RESULTS: Based on the diagnostic and treatment standards developed by EAACI, on international information regarding COVID-19, on guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international organizations, and on previous experience, a panel of experts including clinicians, psychologists, IT experts, and basic scientists along with EAACI and the "Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA)" initiative have developed recommendations for the optimal management of allergy clinics during the current COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations are grouped into nine sections on different relevant aspects for the care of patients with allergies.
CONCLUSIONS: This international Position Paper provides recommendations on operational plans and procedures to maintain high standards in the daily clinical care of allergic patients while ensuring the necessary safety measures in the current COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS: A questionnaire development and validation study was conducted. The resilience domains and items were identified and generated through a literature review. The content validation was carried out by content experts and the content validity index (CVI) was calculated. The face validation was performed by medical officers and the face validity index (FVI) was calculated. The final MeRS was administered to 167 medical officers, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability analysis were performed to assess MeRS's factorial structure and internal consistency.
RESULTS: Four domains with 89 items of medical professionals' resilience were developed. Following that, the content and face validation was conducted, and a total of 41-items remained for construct validation. EFA extracted four factors, namely growth, control, involvement, and resourceful, with a total of 37 items. The items' CVI and FVI values were more than 0.80. The final MeRS's items had factor loading values ranged from 0.41 to 0.76, and the Cronbach's alpha values of the resilience domains ranged from 0.72 to 0.89.
CONCLUSIONS: MeRS is a promising scale for measuring medical professionals' resilience as it showed good psychometric properties. This study provided validity evidence in terms of content, response process, and internal structure that supported the validity of MeRS in the measurement of resilience domains among medical professionals.
BACKGROUND: Despite advocacy being a crucial role for nurses, its scope is often limited in clinical practice. Although numerous studies have identified barriers to patient advocacy, their recommendations for resolution were unclear.
METHOD: The study employed a constructivist grounded theory methodology, with 13 Saudi Arabian registered nurses, working in critical care, in a tertiary academic teaching hospital. Semi-structured interviews, with broad open-ended questions, and reflective participant journals were used to collect data. All interviews were concurrently analysed and transcribed verbatim.
RESULTS: Gender, culture, education, subjugation, communal patronage, organisational support and repercussions, and role-associated risks were all revealed as factors affecting their ability to act as advocates for critically ill patients.
CONCLUSION: Saudi Arabian ICU nurses in the study believed that advocacy is problematic. Despite attempting to advocate for their patients, they are unable to act to an optimal level, instead choosing avoidance of the potential risks associated with the role, or confrontation, which often had undesirable outcomes. Patient advocacy from a Saudi Arabian nursing perspective is contextually complex, controversial and remains uncertain. Further research is needed to ensure patient safety is supported by nurses as effective advocates.