A grounded theory methodology was used to explore patients' experiences with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and hemodialysis. The emerging theory suggests that a "new sense of self" is an emotional/psychological state that fluctuates with the evolving meanings of illness and treatment and perceived quality of supports. The findings indicate that when confronted with this new way of being in the world, the individual becomes cognizant of an uncertain future, continued dependence on life-sustaining technology and the expertise of health care providers, and the demands on and sacrifices incurred by significant others. All aspects of patients' experiences with ESRD and hemodialysis treatment must be considered if health care providers are to facilitate positive health outcomes.
Objective: Bariatric surgery results in significant weight loss in the majority of patients. Improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an equally important outcome; however, there are few studies reporting long-term (5 years) HRQoL outcomes. This study assesses the quality of evidence and effectiveness of surgery on HRQoL 5 years. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Review, EmBase, CINANL, PsycInfo, obesity conference abstracts, and reference lists were searched. Keywords were bariatric surgery, obesity, and quality of life. Studies were included if (1) there was 5 years follow-up, (2) patients had class II or III obesity, (3) individuals completed a validated HRQoL survey, and (4) there was a nonsurgical comparison group with obesity. Two reviewers independently assessed each study. Results: From 1376 articles, 9 studies were included in the systematic review (SR) and 6 in the metaanalysis (MA). Inconsistent results for long-term improvements in physical and mental health emerged from the SR. In contrast, the MA found significant improvements in these domains 5 years after surgery. Conclusions: Study findings provide evidence for a substantial and significant improvement in physical and mental health favoring the surgical group compared with controls spanning 5 to 25 years after surgery.
The findings support the negative impact of reform on clinical managers, and the strong link between positive ratings of culture, trust, and satisfaction, and greater commitment and intent to stay. Greater attention should focus on promoting more positive cultures and work-related attitudes, and less turnover intentions.
BackgroundIn Canada waiting lists for bariatric surgery are common, with wait times on average > 5 years. The meaning of waiting for bariatric surgery from the patients’ perspective must be understood if health care providers are to act as facilitators in promoting satisfaction with care and quality care outcomes. The aims of this study were to explore patients’ perceptions of waiting for bariatric surgery, the meaning and experience of waiting, the psychosocial and behavioral impact of waiting for treatment and identify health care provider and health system supportive measures that could potentially improve the waiting experience.MethodsTwenty-one women and six men engaged in in-depth interviews that were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a grounded theory approach to data collection and analysis between June 2011 and April 2012. The data were subjected to re-analysis to identify perceived health care provider and health system barriers to accessing bariatric surgery.ResultsThematic analysis identified inequity as a barrier to accessing bariatric surgery. Three areas of perceived inequity were identified from participants’ accounts: socioeconomic inequity, regional inequity, and inequity related to waitlist prioritization. Although excited about their acceptance as candidates for surgery, the waiting period was described as stressful, anxiety provoking, and frustrating. Anger was expressed towards the health care system for the long waiting times. Participants identified the importance of health care provider and health system supports during the waiting period. Recommendations on how to improve the waiting experience included periodic updates from the surgeon’s office about their position on the wait list; a counselor who specializes in helping people going through this surgery, dietitian support and further information on what to expect after surgery, among others.ConclusionPatients’ perceptions of accessing and waiting for bariatric surgery are shaped by perceived and experienced socioeconomic, regional, and waitlist prioritization inequities. A system addressing these inequities must be developed. Waiting for surgery is inherent in publicly funded health care systems; however, ensuring equitable access to treatment should be a health system priority. Supports and resources are required to ensure the waiting experience is as positive as possible.
Background and Aim. Obesity is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and may be associated with more severe coronary artery disease (CAD); however, the relationship between body mass index [BMI (kg/m2)] and CAD severity is uncertain and debatable. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between BMI and angiographic severity of CAD. Methods. Duke Jeopardy Score (DJS), a prognostic tool predictive of 1-year mortality in CAD, was assigned to angiographic data of patients ≥18 years of age (N = 8,079). Patients were grouped into 3 BMI categories: normal (18.5–24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25.0–29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥30 kg/m2); and multivariable adjusted hazard ratios for 1-year all-cause and cardiac-specific mortality were calculated. Results. Cardiac risk factor prevalence (e.g., diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia) significantly increased with increasing BMI. Unadjusted all-cause and cardiac-specific 1-year mortality tended to rise with incremental increases in DJS, with the exception of DJS 6 (p < 0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, no significant association of BMI and all-cause (HR 0.70, 95% CI .48–1.02) or cardiac-specific (HR 1.11, 95% CI .64–1.92) mortality was found. Conclusions. This study failed to detect an association of BMI with 1-year all-cause or cardiac-specific mortality after adjustment for potential confounding variables.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.