Search

Background: Evaluation of clinical skills is critically important for nursing students. However, the quality of evaluation tools is poor. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) and Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) on clinical skills of nursing students. Methods: This study was conducted among 108 senior nursing students. Mini-CEX and DOPS were utilized to evaluate clinical skills in the intervention group. Results: The mean of students' scores in all of the five procedures was significantly higher in the intervention group compared to control group.. Students' scores for the procedures significantly raised through the first stage of DOPS and Mini-CEX to the third stage. Conclusions: Utilization of DOPS and Mini-CEX for evaluation of clinical skills in nursing students effectively enhance their learning ability. Implementing of such assessment methods lead to promoting clinical skills of students which eventually help them to provide high quality care for their patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compared to cancers at other sites, lung cancer often results in greater psychosocial distress to both the patients and their caregivers, due to the poor prognosis and survival rate, as well as the heavy symptom burden. In recent years, making protocols of proposed or on-going studies publicly available via clinical trial registries and/or peer-reviewed journals has benefited health sciences with timely communication of the latest research trends and improved transparency in reporting. However, such practice is yet to be a common sight in evidence-informed social work. Hence, this paper discusses the value of publishing protocols in social work research and presents the protocol of a randomized controlled trial that compares the effectiveness of integrative body-mind-spirit intervention with cognitive behavioral therapy for enhancing quality of life of patients with lung cancer and their family caregivers. The data collection process was still on-going at the time of manuscript submission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim was to evaluate an Acceptance commitment therapy (ACT) intervention for people with knee or hip osteoarthritis; a related aim was to compare treatment effects from Rasch-transformed and standard scales. Methods: Participants were recruited from a research database and outpatient rheumatology and orthopaedic clinics at two hospitals. Eligible participants were randomly allocated to either intervention or usual care. Intervention comprised six-sessions of group ACT. Outcomes were assessed two and four months after randomization. Rasch-transformed and standard self-report measures were compared. Qualitative interviews also explored the acceptability of the intervention. Results: Of 87 people assessed for eligibility, 31 (36%) were randomized. The main reason for non-randomization was that participants received surgery. Of the 16 participants randomized to intervention, 64% completed ≥50% of the scheduled group sessions. Follow-up data was complete for 84% participants at two months and 68% at four months. Outcome analysis demonstrated important differences between the Rasch-transformed and standard scales. There were significant differences between the groups in pain. Qualitative interviews with seven participants suggested the intervention was acceptable. Conclusions: ACT for osteoarthritis is likely to be an acceptable treatment option for people with osteoarthritis. Progress to a definitive trial is warranted. Rasch-transformed outcome scales are preferable in clinical trials where possible. Implications for Rehabilitation: Acceptance commitment therapy (ACT) is an effective treatment for many pain conditions andcould be a useful intervention for people with osteoarthritis who have high levels of pain. Rasch analysis is a measurement technique that may enable greater precision in detectingmeaningful treatment effects in routine clinical outcomes. The ACT intervention was successful in reducing pain and sleep difficulties and there werenotable differences in effects between standard and Rasch-transformed scales. In a relatively small trial, ACT may to be an acceptable intervention for people with osteoarthritisand progress to a definitive trial is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare simulated patients (SP) versus seminars for training audiology students to take a case history and give feedback with adult patients.Design: A randomized controlled trial with cross-over.Study sample: Twenty-four audiology students, five SPs, two clinical educators (CE) and three evaluators. Students were randomly allocated to Group 1 who completed SP then seminar training or Group 2 who completed seminar then SP training. The SP training saw each student work with an SP in a clinic room and receive individualized feedback. The seminar training saw the student group work with a single CE in a lecture room and receive group feedback. All students were assessed taking a case history and giving feedback to an SP before, between, and after the training blocks.Results: Mixed model analyses of derived factors for case history and feedback showed significant (p < 0.05) effects for assessment occasion (i.e. student skills improved with more training) but not for training sequence (i.e. order of training did not affect skill improvements) or training type (i.e. type of training did not affect skill improvements).Conclusion: SP training provided no benefit over seminar training in audiology students learning case history and feedback skills with adult patients. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]