Search

This study is a national cross‐sectional survey, conducted in November 2014, of 366 dental hygienists and dentists who had suspected maltreatment but did not report it to Norwegian Child Welfare Services (CWS). The aims of the present paper are to identify the reasons why public dental healthcare professionals are reluctant to report suspected child maltreatment to CWS and to determine whether there are differences in the identified barriers according to socio‐demographic variables. The questionnaire was based on earlier studies and was adapted to fit the Norwegian context. The most frequently chosen reason for not reporting was "unsure of own assessment" (90.4%). Thirteen items pertaining to not reporting were factorised into three factors of barriers. These factors were "insufficient knowledge of child maltreatment and reporting", "fear of the consequences for oneself and the dental clinic", and "fear of the consequences for the patient and their family". A t test revealed that public dental healthcare personnel who had not received training on maltreatment and reporting to CWS during their professional education scored significantly higher on the barrier "insufficient knowledge of child maltreatment and reporting" than did dental personnel who had received such training. Furthermore, dental personnel with more years of experience (11+) scored higher on this barrier than did dental personnel with less experience. No other significant differences in barriers were observed. Public dental healthcare personnel have a mandatory obligation to report to CWS if they suspect child maltreatment. Despite this obligation, the present study reveals that several barriers to reporting exist. This study underscores the importance of strengthening knowledge among dental hygienists and dentists about when and how to report, both during education and in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes the participation of informal caregivers in the discharge process when patients aged 80 and over who were admitted from home to different hospitals in Norway were discharged to long-term community care. Data for this cross-sectional survey were collected through telephone interviews with a consecutive sample of 262 caregivers recruited between October 2007 and May 2009. The Discharge of Elderly Questionnaire was developed by the research team and was designed to elicit data concerning informal caregivers' self-reported perceptions on participation in the discharge process. A descriptive and comparative analysis of Thompson's levels of participation reported by the older generation (spouses and siblings) and the younger generation (adult children and children-in-law, nieces and grandchildren) was undertaken using bivariate cross-tabulations and chi-square tests for association and trend. Analyses showed that the younger generation of caregivers received and provided information to hospital staff to a greater degree than the older generation. Overall, 52% of the informal caregivers reported co-operating with the staff to a high or to some degree. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyse factors predicting the likelihood of informal caregivers reporting co-operation with hospital staff. The odds of younger generation caregivers reporting co-operation were more than twice as high ( OR = 2.121, P = 0.045) as the odds of the older generation. Caregivers of patients with a hearing impairment had higher odds of reporting co-operation ( OR = 1.722, P = 0.049) than caregivers of patients with no such impairment. The length of hospital stay, the caregiver's and patient's gender and education level were not significantly associated with caregiver's co-operation. The informal caregivers' experiences with information practices and user participation in hospitals highlight important challenges that must be taken seriously to ensure co-operation between families and hospitals when elderly patients are discharged back to the community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]