Search

Background and Aims: Nurses are highly susceptible to developing low back pain (LBP), which is considered a common occupational hazard. The present study investigated the efficacy of flexible learning methods on the nurses' awareness, perspectives, and practice regarding the prevention of LBP., Methods: In pre-test posttest quasi-experimental study conducted from June to December 2019, 153 eligible nurses working in three hospitals were participated. Researchers divided the hospitals into three groups with similar numbers of participants (around 55 each) using a random process. One group received an educational intervention using an audio-visual animation, another group got a visual pamphlet, and the last group served as a control with no intervention. All nurses completed a validated questionnaire designed by the researchers to assess their awareness, perspectives, and practices related to preventing lower back pain. The questionnaire was given three times: before the intervention, 1 week after, and 4 weeks after., Results: The study found that participants in the audio-visual and visual pamphlet groups scored significantly higher on awareness, perspective, and practice measures compared to the control group. Interestingly, the visual pamphlet group showed even greater awareness and practice scores compared to the audio-visual group ( p  < 0.001). However, the audio-visual group achieved a higher perspective score compared to the visual pamphlet group ( p  < 0.001)., Conclusion: Nurses' perspective, awareness, and practice towards LBP prevention can be improved by blending the visual pamphlet and audio-visual animation., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The present study was conducted with the aim of designing and validating questionnaires for evaluating the public health students' knowledge, performance, and satisfaction (KPS) in the course of educational technology., Methods: The present study was conducted with qualitative-quantitative approach. Qualitative stage was done based on experts' opinion and related articles and questionnaires for developing, designing, and validating the tools. For validating the tools, face validity and content validity was done based on the opinion of the 10 expert panel. In quantitative stage, all initial validated tools were implemented on 50 students of public health for determining the reliability. The reliability of the tools was calculated using the internal consistency method of the items with Cronbach's ⍺ coefficient, and Kuder-Richardson. All analyses were conducted using SPSS-19 software., Results: In the field of qualitative research, an assessment tool consisting of 20 four-option questions was designed. The content validity of this tool was confirmed based on the opinions of 10 educational experts, with CVI Total = 0.862 and CVR = 0.885. Additionally, the reliability of the tool was validated through testing on 50 public health students, resulting in a reliability coefficient of r  = 0.780. Furthermore, for performance evaluation, four assessment tools each comprising 20 questions (totaling 80 questions) were designed. The validity values for these tools in the areas of PowerPoint (CVI = 0.981, CVR = 0.960), pamphlet (CVI = 0.866, CVR = 0.877), poster (CVI = 0.871, CVR = 0.906), role-playing (CVI = 0.871, CVR = 0.980), and the reliability of the tools with Cronbach's ⍺ r  > 0.80 were confirmed. In the satisfaction assessment section, a researcher-made questionnaire consisting of 18 questions across seven domains was designed, with confirmed content validity (CVI = 0.949, CVR = 0.861) and reliability ( r  = 0.928)., Conclusions: It seems that this tool can be used to measure the KPS of students from the educational technology course of the health field and similar fields., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2024 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background and Aims: The present study was conducted with the aim of investigating the relationship between health-promoting lifestyle profile (HPLP) among medical students and contextual factors such as gender, age, field of study, academic level, marital status, history of physical and mental illnesses, and smoking., Methods: The present research was conducted in a cross-sectional method in 2021 on 500 students of Shiraz University of Medical Students. An e-questionnaire link was sent to them via email. The research tool was the HPLP questionnaire consisting of 52 questions in six domains in a 4-point Likert scale. Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 24 with one-sample t -test, independent t -test, analysis of variance, and Tukey's post hoc test., Results: A total of 500 students fully answered the questions completely. All components of a healthy lifestyle-except for exercise-obtained a score higher than the cut-off point. The component of Self-Actualization (spiritual growth) (3.035 ± 0.68) had the highest score, while the lowest score was related to exercise and physical activity (2.126 ± 0.60). Married individuals had a better average health score compared to singles ( p  = 0.047). The average health score did not have a significant relationship with gender, but significantly related to age, field of study ( p  < 0.001), history of mental illnesses ( p  < 0.001) and Smoking ( p  < 0.001)., Conclusion: It seems that university officials should pay more attention to the health domain of students' lifestyles, such as nutrition, the development of exercise and physical activities, and the management of stress and mental health. Additionally, providing necessary awareness and considering training courses, as well as developing sports and recreational facilities, can be effective in creating a better environment for the growth and development of students and ensuring their well-being., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)