Search

Aims and objectives: To assess and compare the quality of paper-based and electronic- based health records. The comparison examined three criteria: content, documentation process and structure. Background: Nursing documentation is a significant indicator of the quality of patient care delivery. It can be either paper-based or organised within the system known as the electronic health records. Nursing documentation must be completed at the highest standards, to ensure the safety and quality of healthcare services. However, the evidence is not clear on which one of the two forms of documentation (paper-based versus electronic health records is more qualified. Methods: A retrospective, descriptive, comparative design was used to address the study’s purposes. A convenient number of patients’ records, from two public hospitals, were audited using the Cat-ch-Ing audit instrument. The sample size consisted of 434 records for both paper-based health records and electronic health records from medical and surgical wards. Results: Electronic health records were better than paper-based health records in terms of process and structure. In terms of quantity and quality content, paper-based records were better than electronic health records. The study affirmed the poor quality of nursing documentation and lack of nurses’ knowledge and skills in the nursing process and its application in both paper-based and electronic-based systems. Conclusion: Both forms of documentation revealed drawbacks in terms of content, process and structure. This study provided important information, which can guide policymakers and administrators in identifying effective strategies aimed at enhancing the quality of nursing documentation. Relevance to clinical practice: Policies and actions to ensure quality nursing documentation at the national level should focus on improving nursing knowledge, competencies, practice in nursing process, enhancing the work environment and nursing workload, as well as strengthening the capacity building of nursing practice to improve the quality of nursing care and patients’ outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of this study is to cross‐culturally translate and adapt the Cardiac Self‐Efficacy Questionnaire into Arabic and subsequently evaluate the psychometric properties of that translation in a population of Arabic patients. Method: The original English version of the Cardiac Self‐Efficacy Questionnaire was translated into Arabic following a process recommended by the World Health Organization. A convenience sample consisting of 268 Jordanian patients with coronary heart disease was recruited from a university‐affiliated hospital in Amman, Jordan. Data were collected from October 2018 to March 2019. The factor structure, face and content validities, and internal consistency of the Arabic Cardiac Self‐Efficacy Questionnaire (A‐CSEQ) were evaluated. Results: The factor structure analysis supported a three‐factor high‐order structure of the A‐CSEQ. Face validity showed that the language used, style, and format were clear. The content validity demonstrated a very good content validity index. The reliability was good with ranging from 0.89 to 0.93 for all questionnaire subscales. Conclusion: The A‐CSEQ is a valid and reliable instrument to assess the cardiac self‐efficacy of Arabic patients diagnosed with coronary heart disease. Further assessment of the psychometric properties of the A‐CSEQ with different cardiac problems is now recommended. SUMMARY STATEMENT: What is already known about this topic? Globally, cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death and are increasing progressively particularly in the Middle Eastern countries.High self‐efficacy level is associated with the adoption of a healthy lifestyle by patients with coronary heart disease (CHD).There is no valid and reliable Arabic tool to measure cardiac self‐efficacy among CHD patients comparable with the Cardiac Self‐Efficacy Questionnaire (CSEQ). What this paper adds? The Arabic version of the Cardiac Self‐Efficacy Questionnaire (A‐CSEQ) is a valid and reliable instrument to assess cardiac self‐efficacy level among patients with CHD.Using Modern Standard Arabic (Fusha) during the translation and cross‐cultural adaptation process makes the A‐CSEQ more broadly applicable for a range of cardiac patients in Arabic‐speaking countries. The implications of this paper: Nursing leaders can use the translated version of Cardiac Self‐Efficacy Questionnaire to evaluate cardiac self‐efficacy and to improve self‐management skills of patients with CHD in Arabic‐speaking countries.Measuring the self‐efficacy levels of Arabic speakers using the A‐CSEQ can help nurses applying secondary prevention intervention measures and developing cardiac rehabilitation programmes in Arabic‐speaking countries.The A‐CSEQ can be used in further research in the future, through implementing comparisons between study outcomes in Arabic contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This comparative descriptive study sought to determine the impact of glocalization on international social work education. Using quantitative methods, this study reports objective findings for a randomly selected, non-probability, purposive sample of 178 faculty members who were geographically distributed among faculties and departments of social work at 22 universities in eight Arab countries. The primary research instrument used was a standardized paper and pencil questionnaire. Data analysis of the responses of the faculty members found that participants’ attitudes were equally weak on the track of glocalization and international social work education. This could be attributed to the variables of faculty members, social work students, university textbooks, quality of library services, methods of teaching, field practicum, and quality of student evaluation. In contrast, the attitudes of the faculty members averaged on the track of glocalization and international social work education, which could be attributed to the variable of social work curricula. The analysis also revealed a marked absence of sustained contact with social work professionals and scholars from other regions and societies of the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]