Search

Livestock cause many fatal and non-fatal agricultural accidents. It is crucial to understand how farmers perceive and manage different risks associated with livestock handling to devise better solutions for accident reduction. The current study investigated farmers' perception and management of four types of livestock handling risks related to self, animal, environment, and equipment. Additionally, farmers' and agricultural stakeholders' perspectives were compared. Two samples comprising 56 farmers and 55 stakeholders from the UK and Ireland completed the online study. Participants were presented with eight short livestock handling vignettes, two per risk type, and were asked to decide whether they would proceed with the task, to report their reasoning, and to detail their risk management strategies. Likert-scale responses across scenarios were compared. Thematic analysis was used to identify qualitative data patterns. Stress and fatigue were perceived as low risk by both samples based on quantitative and qualitative results. The thematic analysis revealed that risk was evaluated in terms of broader aspects, including animal welfare and duty. Participants reported the use of cognitive non-technical skills when mitigating risks associated with handling livestock alone. By changing safety messages to capture farmer priorities, agricultural organisations could encourage risk avoidance, especially in situations involving stress or fatigue. Furthermore, the cognitive non-technical skills identified could be trained within existing courses for farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Frontline workers have shown extraordinary resilience and sustained efforts since the outbreak of COVID-19. The present study used semi-structured interviews with 38 frontline workers in the UK and Ireland to explore the psychological impact of working through COVID-19. The qualitative data were analysed systematically using thematic analysis. Four themes were interpreted: 1)) "I've stopped turning the telly on. I've had to because the news was making me ill": An ecosystem of influence; 2) "Dead, dead, dead": The emotional and psychological toll: 3) "It's shone a light on what we're failing on as well": Injustices, hierarchies and heroes: and 4) "I definitely think COVID happened for a reason to stop us in our tracks and to slow us down": Unexpected positives. This research offers insights into how frontline workers make sense of their experiences during periods of enormous societal and occupational stress. The learnings generated have relevance for government and organisational policy-makers who have opportunities to shape future conditions for frontline workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Palliative care is acknowledged as an appropriate approach to support older people in nursing homes. Ethical issues arise from many aspects of palliative care provision in nursing homes; however, they have not been investigated in this context. Aim: To explore the ethical issues associated with palliative care in nursing homes in the United Kingdom. Design: Exploratory, sequential, mixed-methods design. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with 13 registered nurses and 10 healthcare assistants (HCAs) working in 13 nursing homes in the United Kingdom were used to explore ethical issues in palliative care. The 'Ethical Issues in Palliative Care for Nursing Homes' instrument was used to measure the frequency and level of distress arising from ethical issues through a cross-sectional survey with 69 registered nurses and 129 healthcare assistants. Data collection occurred between December 2014 and November 2015. Ethical considerations: Ethical approval was granted by Queen's University's School of Nursing and Midwifery Research Ethics Committee and governance sought from each nursing home's manager. Findings: The interviews revealed three themes: ethical issues in practice; relational issues; and organisational issues. No significant differences between registered nurses and healthcare assistants were evident, confirming the patterns emerging from the interviews. Relational issues, primarily issues with residents and families, occurred most frequently and caused greater distress. Conclusion: The shared environment is key in the experience of ethical issues; therefore, multidisciplinary education is needed for ethical decision making in palliative care. Addressing staff knowledge and service organisation may reduce ethical issues locally and provide a benchmark for global change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is increasing recognition that dysphagia has significant implications for a person's psychological well‐being, social participation and quality of life (QOL). However, a paucity of research exists regarding the clinical management of this area. To inform future research and the development of appropriate and beneficial resources and guidelines, a better understanding of the current practice of speech and language therapists (SLTs) in this area would be useful. This information will highlight current challenges to clinical practice and the ongoing development needs of the profession, which are, as of yet, undocumented. Aims: To determine the practices of SLTs when addressing QOL issues in individuals with dysphagia, the beliefs of SLTs regarding the impact of dysphagia on QOL, the current trends in assessing and managing QOL in dysphagia, and if variations in beliefs and practices in this area exist. Methods & Procedures: An anonymous cross‐sectional, non‐experimental survey study was used. The survey consisted of 18 questions exploring participants' beliefs and opinions regarding dysphagia and QOL, current clinical practice in the area, perceived facilitators and barriers, and education, training and development needs. The survey was created on Survey Monkey and disseminated by e‐mail link to SLT professional bodies. Purposive and snowball sampling were used and participants self‐selected based on the information provided alongside the e‐mail link. Inclusion criteria for the study were a qualification in speech and language therapy, proficiency in the English language, and access to a computer with the internet. Outcomes & Results: A total of 148 SLTs working across the UK, Ireland and South Africa completed the survey. Over 90% of respondents believe that dysphagia has a negative impact on QOL, but only 25% are currently satisfied with the amount of clinical time they can dedicate to this area. Staffing, resources, a lack of best‐practice guidelines and disease‐specific QOL assessment tools were cited as contributing factors. A number of facilitators and barriers to best practice were also highlighted. Based on these findings, professional development actions for the future are suggested. Conclusions & Implications: SLTs believe they have an important role to play in supporting QOL issues in dysphagia. However, it is reported that the area is currently under‐developed, under‐resourced and under‐supported. Increased awareness raising of the role of SLT, alongside the development of best‐practice guidelines and disease‐specific QOL assessment tools, will enhance the quality of care that can be offered in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Tractors are a source of injury and fatality in agriculture. Despite this farmers continue to engage in risk-taking behaviors, including operating tractors without appropriate equipment. In order to change behaviors and attitudes toward safety, it is important to understand how farmers approach different types of risk relevant to tractor use. The current study used a qualitative approach to investigate farmer perception of four types of tractor-based risk related to self, equipment, lack of safety features, and environment. Method: A sample of 148 farmers from the United Kingdom and Ireland was recruited from farming forums to take part in an online scenario-based qualitative study. Participants were presented with 12 tractor-based scenarios, three from each category of risk, and asked to indicate if they would proceed to use the tractor (go) or not (no-go), then report their reasoning. Thematic analysis was used to identify data patterns. Results: Farmers appeared to assess the consequences of risk in broader terms than the risk of injury to themselves; they also evaluated risk in terms of potential costs (e.g., repair bill) and losses (e.g., delay). Analysis indicated that financial risk was considered with more caution than personal risk in many cases. Farmers also considered usability, such as the functionality of tractor seat belts, indicating the importance of ensuring all safety equipment is fit for purpose. Conclusion: The management of agricultural risk should consider farmer priorities (such as financial costs) in order to develop effective messaging that focuses on those priorities, with the aim of reducing risk-taking behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]