Search

Background: Strict patient isolation in hospital is associated with adverse health outcomes. However, there is a lack of high‐quality evidence for effective interventions to improve safety and quality of care for these patients. Aims: To identify patient reported areas for improvement in the care of patients in hospital isolation and to determine the feasibility of collecting patient reported outcomes using validated tools. Methods: Design: An exploratory mixed methods study. Setting: A major metropolitan teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Participants: Patients in hospital isolation for transmissible infections. Data collection: Data were collected by (1) phone interviews with patients in isolation and (2) seven validated measurement tools to assess cognition, loneliness, nutritional status, quality of life, anxiety and depression and physical activity. Data were collected between September and December 2021. Data analysis: Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively including participant characteristics and outcome data. Results: Participants identified areas for improvement including activities to decrease boredom, more contact with staff to mitigate loneliness and increase comfort care, and formalised communication about clinical treatment and discharge plan. Patients with gastrointestinal symptoms were happier to be alone. There were operational challenges within the health service including delays and miscommunication. Only 70% of the participants completed all questionnaires. Conclusion: This study identified areas for improvement in care of patients in isolation and demonstrated that collecting patient reported outcomes using validated tools was feasible. The results of this research will inform development of an intervention to manage adverse effects. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Patients in hospital isolation require additional consideration to ensure that their needs are met to avoid adverse outcomes. The patient experience and comfort can be negatively affected when fundamental care is lacking. Reporting Method (EQUATOR): EQUATOR guidelines for Mixed Methods Reporting in Rehabilitation & Health Sciences (MMR‐RHS). Patient or Public Contribution: Thirteen patients in hospital isolation agreed to participate in this study, sharing their experiences through interviews and assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Schools have long been perceived as an ideal setting to support the healthy eating behaviours of children. The aim of the study was to examine the views of Australian primary school parents regarding school food and nutrition, including education, practices and policy. Design/methodology/approach: An online survey was conducted among 787 parents in March 2021, which included closed and open-ended questions. Findings: The results indicated the inconsistent implementation of policies and/or varying practices among different schools. Parents' views were slightly associated with some demographic and personal measures including their SES levels, education, age, the main language spoken at home and universalism values. Parents viewed healthy food provision through canteens, policies and informing parents, fruit and vegetable breaks and kitchen and garden programs as the main contributors to the promotion of healthy eating. They believed unhealthy options in canteens, school fairs, events and birthdays are the major contributors to the formation of unhealthy eating habits among children at schools. Results revealed the efforts to establish health promoting school food environments in Australian primary schools; however, inconsistencies and discrepancies among schools should be addressed to ensure equity among all children. Practical implications: The findings may provide directions for policymakers and school managers and can inform future reforms and initiatives in Australian primary schools and elsewhere. Originality/value: This is the first study that has examined Australian parents' views of school food policy, practices and environments using a mixed-methods design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]