Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic immensely impacted care provision, including quality of care in general practice. This paper aimed: (1) to assess how Belgian general practices acted upon the six dimensions of quality of care during COVID-19; (2) to study differences between the three Belgian regions; and (3) to benchmark the performance of the Belgian practices against the performance in other European countries. Methods: The data collected from 479 Belgian practices during 2020–2021 using an online survey as part of the international cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study were analyzed. Hereby, descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and binary logistic regression analyses were performed. Thirty-four survey questions related to the six dimensions of quality of care were selected as outcome variables. The adjusted regression models included four practice characteristics as covariates: practice type, being a teaching practice for GP trainees, multidisciplinarity of the team, and payment system. Results: Belgian practices made important organizational changes to deliver high-quality care during COVID-19. Most practices (n = 259; 56.1%) actively reached out to vulnerable patients. Limitations to the practice building or infrastructure threatened high-quality care in 266 practices (55.5%). Infection prevention measures could not always be implemented during COVID-19, such as using a cleaning protocol (n = 265; 57.2%) and providing a separate doctor bag for infection-related home visits (n = 130; 27.9%). Three hundred and sixty practices (82.0%) reported at least one safety incident related to a delayed care process in patients with an urgent condition. The adjusted regression analysis showed limited significant differences between the Belgian regions regarding the quality of care delivered. Belgian practices demonstrated varied performance compared to other European countries. For example, they excelled in always checking the feasibility of isolation at home but reported more patient safety incidents related to timely care than at least three-quarters of the other European countries. Conclusions: Future studies using different design methods are crucial to investigate which country and practice characteristics are associated with delivering high-quality care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Journal of Social Work is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Simple Summary: Lymphedema is a common complication following gynecological cancer treatment, particularly affecting the lower limbs. However, self-reported data on lymphedema detection remain scarce. To address this gap, Yost developed the Lower Extremity Lymphedema Screening Questionnaire (LELSQ) specifically for women. The LELSQ is a straightforward and user-friendly tool designed for the early identification of lower extremity lymphedema (LEL). The validation of the questionnaire in Dutch was crucial for a larger trial called "The Gynolymph", since there were no validated questionnaires in Dutch for the detection of early LEL. This trial aims to enroll four hundred patients who will utilize the screening tool as part of a patient-reported assessment. By doing so, the trial seeks to detect the early development of lymphedema after cancer treatment. To ensure unbiased results, the study team translated and adapted the lymphedema questionnaire to Dutch. The cross-sectional survey conducted during this process demonstrated high internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and validity. Additionally, face and content validity were confirmed, allowing for the implementation of the questionnaire in the early detection of LEL among Dutch-speaking women. Background: Validated questionnaires of self-reported LEL are important in the assessment and diagnosis of LEL. The aim of this study was to validate and translate a Dutch version of the screening questionnaire, the LELSQ developed and validated by Yost et al. Methods: We tested the questionnaire on a group of healthy women and a group of patients diagnosed with LEL. The translation was carried out using the forward and backward method from English to Dutch. Statistical analyses: SPSS (IBM corp, Armonk, New York, NY, USA) version 28.0.1.0 (001) was used for statistical analysis in the process of validation. The internal consistency was assessed by determining Cronbach's alpha. The reliability was tested by test–retest reliability. The validity was determined by ROC analysis, and content and face validity were evaluated. Results: The internal consistency score in both groups had a strong value (0.83 to 0.90). The test–retest reliability was also strong in both groups. Face and content validity showed the LELSQ is an easy, understandable questionnaire that is not too time-consuming in the early detection of LEL. The ROC analysis showed an AUC value of 0.93, indicating strong validity. Conclusions: The validated Dutch translation showed high values for internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and validity, which allows us to implement the questionnaire in the early detection of LEL after gynecological cancer treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. Specific neck exercises are recommended in the rehabilitation of chronic nonspecific neck pain (CNNP). They are unfortunately often accompanied by acute pain flare-ups. Global exercises might be a beneficial addition, as they activate endogenous analgesia without overloading painful structures. However, it is still unclear which type of exercise is most effective. This randomized controlled trial was done to evaluate the effect of an online blended program of global and specific neck exercises, compared to programs including only 1 of both types of exercise. Methods. Forty-eight patients with CNNP were randomized into 3 groups. Online questionnaires were collected at baseline, at midtreatment, immediately after treatment, and at the 3-month follow-up. Quantitative sensory testing and actigraphy were assessed at baseline and after treatment. Linear mixed-model analyses were performed to evaluate treatment effects within and between groups. Neck pain-related disability after treatment was considered the primary outcome. Results. No time x treatment interaction effects were found. All groups improved in neck pain-related disability, pain intensity, self-reported symptoms of central sensitization, local pain sensitivity, physical activity, and pain medication use. No effects were found on quality of life, sleep quality, depression, anxiety, stress, widespread pain sensitivity, health economics, or actigraphy measurements. A higher global perceived effect was reported after performing the blended program, compared to the other groups. Conclusion. A blended exercise program was not superior to the stand-alone programs in reducing disability. Nevertheless, the global perceived effect of this type of exercise was higher. Future research necessitates larger sample sizes to adequately explore the optimal type of exercise for patients with CNNP. Impact. Exercise therapy should be an important part of the rehabilitation of patients with CNNP, regardless of the type of exercise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Malnutrition, sedentary lifestyle, cognitive dysfunction and poor psychological well‐being are often reported in patients on haemodialysis (HD). Aims: We aimed to explore needs, barriers and facilitators—as perceived by patients, their carers, and healthcare professionals (HCPs) for increasing the adherence to the diet, to physical activity and cognition and psychological well‐being. Methods: This is an observational cross‐sectional study following the STROBE statement. This study is part of an ERASMUS+ project, GoodRENal—aiming to develop digital tools as an educational approach to patients on HD. For that, the GoodRENal comprises HD centers located in four Belgium, Greece, Spain and Sweden. Exploratory questionnaires were developed regarding the perceived needs, barriers and facilitators regarding the diet, physical activity, cognition and psychological well‐being from the perspective of patients, their carers and HCPs. Results: In total, 38 patients, 34 carers and 38 HCPs were included. Nutrition: For patients and carers, the main needs to adhere to the diet included learning more about nutrients and minerals. For patients, the main barrier was not being able to eat what they like. Physical activity: As needs it was reported information about type of appropriate physical activity, while fatigue was listed as the main barrier. For Cognitive and emotional state, it was perceived as positive for patients and carers perception but not for HCPs. The HCPs identified as needs working as a team, having access to specialised HCP and being able to talk to patients in private. Conclusions: Patients and their carers listed as needs guidance regarding nutrition and physical activity but were positive with their cognitive and emotional state. The HCPs corroborated these needs and emphasised the importance of teamwork and expert support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]