Search

Youth is a period in life when the risk of violence victimization is high and association between victimization and ill health is well established. Youth rarely reveal violence victimization to health professionals if not directly asked but favor health professionals asking about victimization. The study's primary aim was to examine health outcomes in young women being routinely asked about violence victimization and offered subsequent support, compared with controls, at 12-month follow-up. Secondary aims were to examine to what extent routine inquiry altered the consultation and re-victimization rates during the study period. A randomized controlled intervention study was conducted at Swedish youth health centers. Participants assigned to the intervention group were asked structured questions about violence. Victimized participants received empowering strategies and were offered further counseling. Participants in the control group completed questionnaires about victimization after the visit. Both groups answered questions about sociodemographics and health, constructed from validated instruments. A questionnaire was administered to all participants 12 months after baseline. Of 1,445 eligible young women, 1,051 (73%) participated, with 54% of the participants completing the 12-month follow-up. Lifetime violence victimization was reported by 53% in the intervention group and 60% in the control group, ns. There were no significant differences in health outcomes, between baseline and 12-month follow-up, within either group or between groups. Re-victimization rates were 16% in the intervention group and 12% in the control group, ns. Of victimized young women in the intervention group, 14% wanted and received further counseling. Routine inquiry about violence victimization and empowering strategies were feasible within ordinary consultations at youth health centers but did not demonstrate improved health outcomes at 12-month follow-up compared with controls. Questions about violence led to a high degree of disclosure, and 14% of victimized young women in the intervention group received further counseling as a result. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background People typically seek primary health care for daytime symptoms and impairments they experience in association with their insomnia. However, few studies address the question of whether insomnia treatment can improve such symptomatology. Objectives To investigate whether a nurse-led group treatment program, based on the techniques of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), improved daytime symptomatology in primary care patients with insomnia. Outcomes Fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale [FSS]; main outcome), mood (General Health Questionnaire and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale), health-related quality of life (Short-Form Health Survey), general daytime functioning, specific daytime symptoms (individual items from the Insomnia Severity Index and Uppsala Sleep Inventory), and dysfunctional beliefs (Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitudes about Sleep). Design A randomized controlled trial including baseline and post-treatment assessment and a 1-year post-treatment follow-up of the intervention group. Settings Seven primary health care centers (Stockholm, Sweden). Participants One hundred and sixty-five primary care patients who meet the criteria for insomnia disorder (mean age 54 years, SD 16). Most were women (73%). Exclusion criteria: severe untreated illness, bipolar disorder, current stressful life event, night shift work, and untreated sleep disorder other than insomnia. Methods Data came from a randomized controlled trial of a 10-week nurse-led group treatment for insomnia based on CBT-I (n = 90). The control condition was treatment as usual (n = 75). In accordance with intention-to-treat principles, analyses included data on patients who completed baseline assessments (intervention n = 82, and control group n = 71; post-treatment dropout rate 20%). Fifty-four patients were included in the 1-year follow-up. Results Fatigue severity improved significantly more (p < 0.001) in the intervention than in the control group (intervention, total FSS score 37.2 [SD 11.9] to 31.0 [SD 13.4] vs. control 35.9 [SD 12.1] to 35.7 [SD 12.8]). This was true also for measurements on mood (psychological distress and depressive symptoms), health-related quality of life (mental functioning), general daytime functioning, specific daytime symptoms (worry about sleep, sleepiness, bodily tiredness, and difficulty concentrating) and dysfunctional beliefs. All improvements were maintained one year after group treatment. Conclusions Many aspects of the daytime symptomatology of insomnia were improved via nurse-led group treatment based on CBT-I in primary health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Impaired emotional well-being has detrimental effects on health outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Aims: To evaluate a nurse-led Coping Effectiveness Training (CET) group intervention for patients with CHF. It was hypothesized that CET would increase emotional well-being (primary outcome) and health-related quality (HRQoL) of life and improve clinical outcomes. Furthermore, changes in appraisal and coping as mediators of the intervention effect were examined. Methods: Participants were randomized to either control group (n=51) receiving standard health care or CET intervention group (n=52). Self-assessments of positive affect, negative affect, depression, anxiety, HRQoL, illness perception, coping strategies and social support were performed pre- and post-intervention and after six weeks, six months and 12 months. Time to death and hospitalizations were measured during the entire follow-up (median 35 months, interquartile range 11 months). Results: No significant improvements for emotional well-being and HRQoL in the intervention group compared with the control group were found. After excluding patients with clinical anxiety and depression at baseline the intervention group had significantly lower negative affect (p = 0.022). There were no significant differences regarding cardiovascular events between the groups. The intervention group had greater sense of control over their illness in the short-term (p = 0.036). Conclusion: CET intervention was found to increase sense of control over the illness in the short term. Psychosocial support programmes, like CET, for patients with CHF is currently lacking evidence for implementing in clinical practice. However, the results provide a basis for future studies with a modified CET intervention design and increased study size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To compare and evaluate the treatment outcomes of a nurse-led rheumatology clinic and a rheumatologist-led clinic in patients with low disease activity or in remission who are undergoing biological therapy. Background Patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis treated with biological therapy are usually monitored by rheumatologists. Nurse-led rheumatology clinics have been proposed in patients with low disease activity or in remission. Design Randomized controlled trial. Methods A 12-month follow-up trial was conducted between October 2009 and August 2011, where 107 patients were randomized into two groups with a 6-month follow-up to a nurse-led rheumatology clinic based on person-centred care (intervention group; n = 53) or to a rheumatologist-led clinic (control group; n = 54). The hypothesis was that the nurse-led clinic outcomes would not be inferior to those obtained from a rheumatologist-led clinic at the 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome was disease activity measured by Disease Activity Score 28. Results A total of 47 patients in the intervention group and 50 in the control group completed the 12-month trial. The trial revealed no statistically significant differences between groups in mean change of Disease Activity Score 28, Visual Analogue Scales for pain, the Health Assessment Questionnaire, satisfaction with or confidence in obtaining rheumatology care. Conclusion Patients with stable chronic inflammatory arthritis undergoing biological therapy could be monitored by a nurse-led rheumatology clinic without difference in outcome as measured by the Disease Activity Score 28. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]