Search

A community hospital system covers the entire population of Finland. Yet there is little research on the system beyond routine statistics. More knowledge is needed on the incidence of hospital stays and patient profiles. We investigated the incidence of short-term community hospital stays and the features of care and patients. Prospective observational study. Community hospitals in the catchment area of Kuopio University Hospital in Finland. Short-term (up to one month) community hospital stays of adult residents. The outcome was the incidence rate of short-term community hospital stays according to age, sex and the first underlying diagnoses. A number of 13,482 short-term community hospital stays were analyzed. The patients' mean age was 77 years. The incidence rate of short-term hospital stays was 28.6 stays per 1000 person-years among residents aged <75 years and 419.0 among residents aged ≥75 years. In men aged <75 years, the hospital stay incidence was about 40% higher than in women of the same age but in residents aged ≥75 years incidences did not differ between sexes. The most common diagnostic categories were vascular and respiratory diseases, injuries and mental illnesses. The incidence rate of short-term community hospital stays increased sharply with age and was highest among women aged ≥75 years. Care was required for acute and chronic conditions common in older adults. Community hospitals have a substantial role in hospital care of older adults. Finland has a broad network of community hospitals covering the entire population. More knowledge is needed on incidences and patient profiles of community hospital stays. The incidence of short-term community hospital stays increased sharply with age and was the highest among women aged ≥75 years. Vascular and respiratory diseases accounted for most of the community hospital admissions. Community hospitals play an important role in the care of an aging population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background - Prehospital care is classified into ALS- (advanced life support) and BLS- (basic life support) levels according to the methods used. ALS-level prehospital care uses invasive methods, such as intravenous fluids, medications and intubation. However, the effectiveness of ALS care compared to BLS has been questionable. Aim - The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of ALS- and BLS-level prehospital care. Material and methods - In a systematic review, articles where ALS-level prehospital care was compared to BLS-level or any other treatment were included. The outcome variables were mortality or patient's health-related quality of life or patient's capacity to perform daily activities. Results - We identified 46 articles, mostly retrospective observational studies. The results on the effectiveness of ALS in unselected patient cohorts are contradictory. In cardiac arrest, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation are essential for survival, but prehospital ALS interventions have not improved survival. Prehospital thrombolytic treatment reduces mortality in patients having a myocardial infarction. The majority of research into trauma favours BLS in the case of penetrating trauma and also in cases of short distance to a hospital. In patients with severe head injuries, ALS provided by paramedics and intubation without anaesthesia can even be harmful. If the prehospital care is provided by an experienced physician and by a HEMS organisation (Helicopter Emergency Medical Service), ALS interventions may be beneficial for patients with multiple injuries and severe brain injuries. However, the results are contradictory. Conclusions - ALS seems to improve survival in patients with myocardial infarction and BLS seems to be the proper level of care for patients with penetrating injuries. Some studies indicate a beneficial effect of ALS among patients with blunt head injuries or multiple injuries. There is also some evidence in favour of ALS among patients with epileptic seizures as well as those with a respiratory distress.

Abstract Background If decisions on health care spending are to be as rational and objective as possible, knowledge on cost-effectiveness of routine care is essential. Our aim, therefore, was to evaluate the cost-utility of routine cataract surgery in a real-world setting. Methods Prospective assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients undergoing cataract surgery. 219 patients (mean (SD) age 71 (11) years) entering cataract surgery (in 87 only first eye operated, in 73 both eyes operated, in 59 first eye had been operated earlier) filled in the 15D HRQoL questionnaire before and six months after operation. Direct hospital costs were obtained from a clinical patient administration database and cost-utility analysis performed from the perspective of the secondary care provider extrapolating benefits of surgery to the remaining statistical life-expectancy of the patients. Results Mean (SD) utility score (on a 0–1 scale) increased statistically insignificantly from 0.82 (0.13) to 0.83 (0.14). Of the 15 dimensions of the HRQoL instrument, only seeing improved significantly after operation. Mean utility score improved statistically significantly only in patients reporting significant or major preoperative seeing problems. Of the subgroups, only those whose both eyes were operated during follow-up showed a statistically significant (p < 0.001) improvement. Cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was €5128 for patients whose both eyes were operated and €8212 for patients with only one eye operated during the 6-month follow-up. In patients whose first eye had been operated earlier mean HRQoL deteriorated after surgery precluding the establishment of the cost per QALY. Conclusion Mean utility gain after routine cataract surgery in a real-world setting was relatively small and confined mostly to patients whose both eyes were operated. The cost of cataract surgery per quality-adjusted life year gained was much higher than previously reported and associated with considerable uncertainty.

Objectives: Despite the increasing prevalence of dementia, little is known about individuals' attitudes towards euthanasia on patients with dementia or cognitive impairment. Methods: Nurses (n = 1003) and representatives of the general public (n = 2796), recruited via social media and the Finnish Nurses Association, completed an electronic questionnaire in 2014. Results: Euthanasia due to severe dementia was approved by 54.6% of nurses and 64.4% of the general public. Depending on the age of the patient, between 50.0% and 54.7% of nurses and between 58.3% and 60.9% of the general public supported euthanasia on patients with severe cognitive impairment. Discussion: The attitudes towards euthanasia due to dementia or cognitive impairment are slightly more accepting among the general public than among nurses. Apart from religiosity, none of the background factors were found to be reliable predictors of individuals' attitudes. Additional research is needed to describe the underlying reasons for the attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nurses' voices remain unheard in most debates about euthanasia, although their crucial role in the euthanasia process is widely acknowledged. Moreover, in Canadian euthanasia law, nurses have a more active role, which further highlights the need for knowledge about nurses' attitudes towards their role in the euthanasia process. Research questions: What are Finnish nurses' attitudes towards their potential role in the euthanasia process? Which characteristics are associated with those attitudes? Research design: Cross-sectional web-based survey. Participants and research context: 1003 nurses, recruited via social media and the members' bulletin of the Finnish Nurses Association. Ethical considerations: Ethical approval was obtained from the Committee on Research Ethics of the university to which the first author was affiliated. Findings: The great majority (85.2%) of nurses felt that their perspective should be considered in decision-making related to euthanasia. Furthermore, most of the participants (74.7%) reported willingness to participate in the euthanasia process if it were legal, and 88.6% agreed that a nurse should be present when euthanasia is performed if the patient wishes so. Furthermore, over half agreed that some of the preparatory tasks were part of their job description. However, a minority (32.9%) agreed with a possible obligation to participate based on their profession. Nurses' age, religiosity and educational level influenced their attitudes in the current results. Discussion: Despite the strong agreement on decision-making concerning euthanasia and participation in the euthanasia process, obligation to participate based on the profession was rejected by most participants. Nurses regarded themselves as consultants in the decision-making process, which may indicate their unwillingness to share the responsibility for the decision itself. Conclusion: Specific safety mechanisms should be considered to protect nurses who refuse to be involved in the euthanasia process due to harm that involuntary participation might cause. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite the significant role of nurses in end-of-life care, their attitudes towards euthanasia are under-represented both in the current literature and the controversial debate that is ongoing in several countries. Research questions: What are the attitudes towards euthanasia among Finnish nurses? Which characteristics are associated with those attitudes?. Research design: Cross-sectional web-based survey. Participants and research context: A total of 1003 nurses recruited via the members' bulletin of the Finnish Nurses Association and social media. Ethical considerations: Ethical approval was obtained from the Committee on Research Ethics of the university to which the authors were affiliated. Findings: The majority (74.3%) of the participants would accept euthanasia as part of Finnish healthcare, and 61.8% considered that Finland would benefit from a law permitting euthanasia. Most of the nurses (89.9%) thought that a person must have the right to decide on his or her own death; 77.4% of them considered it likely that they would themselves make a request for euthanasia in certain situations. Discussion: The value of self-determination and the ability to choose the moment and manner of one's death are emphasized in the nurses' attitudes towards euthanasia. Conclusion: A continuous dialogue about euthanasia and nurses' shared values is crucial due to the conflict between nurses' attitudes and current ethical guidelines on nursing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]