Background & Objective:Considering high burden of violence against healthcare workers in Pakistan APPNA Institute of Public Health developed a training to prevent reactive violence among healthcare providers. The purpose of this training was to equip healthcare providers with skills essential to control aggressive behaviors and prevent verbal and non-verbal violence in workplace settings. This study assesses the effectiveness of training in prevention, de-escalation and management of violence in healthcare settings.Methods:A quasi-experimental study was conducted in October, 2016 using mixed method concurrent embedded design. The study assessed effectiveness of de-escalation trainings among health care providers working in emergency and gynecology and obstetrics departments of two teaching hospitals in Karachi. Quantitative assessment was done through structured interviews and qualitative through Focus Group Discussions. Healthcare providers` confidence in coping with patient aggression was also measured using a standard validated tool”.Results:The overall self-perceived mean score of Confidence in Coping with Patient Aggression Instrument “(CCPAI)” scale was significantly higher in intervention group (Mean= 27.49, SD=3.53) as compared to control group (Mean= 23.92, SD=4.52) (p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was observed between intervention and control groups with regard to frequency of violence faced by HCPs post training and major perpetrators of violence..Conclusion:De-escalation of violence training was effective in improving confidence of healthcare providers in coping with patient aggression.
► Main reasons among hospital HCW's included reaction of attendants to adverse outcomes, impatient behavior of patients and attendants, delay in care and lack of facilities ► Among ambulance workers, main reasons included delay in arrival and shifting of the patient and lack of facilities to provide good quality pre-hospital emergency care ► Among field healthcare workers, misconception of vaccines was the main reason. ► This study proposes interventions according to main reasons of violence.What do the findings imply?► The findings of the study provide directions for different healthcare settings on how to protect HCW's. ► The essential interventions required are increasing resources to provide good quality of care, introducing policies to improve responsiveness to patient's needs, training HCW's in communication and deescalation skills and introducing educational and regulatory measures to improve patient and attendant behavio AbsTrACTObjectives To determine the magnitude and determinants of violence against healthcare workers (HCWs) and to identify the predominant types and causes of violence experienced by them.Methodology A cross-sectional survey based on structured questionnaire adopted from previous surveys and qualitative data was conducted in 4 large cities and 12 districts in 3 provinces of Pakistan. The survey covered 8579 from all cadres of HCWs, including doctors, nurses, technicians, support staff, ambulance workers, vaccinators, lady health visitors, midwives and lady health workers (LHWs). The predictors of overall violence experienced, physical violence experienced and verbal violence experienced were separately analysed for tertiary care hospitals, secondary care hospitals, primary care hospitals and field-level HCWs. Logistic regression was used to compute adjusted ORs with 95% CIs for the association of different factors with the violence experienced. results More than one-third (38.4%) reported having experienced any form of violence in the last 6 months. Verbal violence was the most commonly experienced form (33.9%), followed by physical violence (6.6%). The main reasons for physical violence were death of patients (17.6%), serious condition of patients (16.6%) and delay in care (13.4%). Among the different types of field HCWs, emergency vehicle operators were significantly more likely to experience verbal violence compared with LHWs (adjusted OR=1.97; 95% CI 1.31 to 2.94; p=0.001). Among hospital HCWs, those working in private hospitals were significantly less likely to experience physical violence (adjusted OR=0.52; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.71; p=0.001) and verbal violence (adjusted OR=0.57; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.68
BackgroundCommunication skills are essential for physicians to practice Medicine. Evidence for the validity and domain specificity of communication skills in physicians is equivocal and requires further research. This research was conducted to adduce evidence for content and context specificity of communication skills and to assess the usefulness of a generic instrument for assessing communication skills in International Medical Graduates (IMGs).MethodsA psychometric design was used for identifying the reliability and validity of the communication skills instruments used for high-stakes exams for IMG's. Data were collected from 39 IMGs (19 men – 48.7%; 20 women – 51.3%; Mean age = 41 years) assessed at 14 station OSCE and subsequently in supervised clinical practice with several instruments (patient surveys; ITERs; Mini-CEX).ResultsAll the instruments had adequate reliability (Cronbach's alpha: .54 – .96). There were significant correlations (r range: 0.37 – 0.70, p < .05) of communication skills assessed by examiner with standardized patients, and of mini-CEX with patient surveys, and ITERs. The intra-item reliability across all cases for the 13 items was low (Cronbach's alpha: .20 – .56). The correlations of communication skills within method (e.g., OSCE or clinical practice) were significant but were non-significant between methods (e.g., OSCE and clinical practice).ConclusionThe results provide evidence of context specificity of communication skills, as well as convergent and criterion-related validity of communication skills. Both in OSCEs and clinical practice, communication checklists need to be case specific, designed for content validity.
Background The coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) in China has influenced every aspect of life worldwide. Given the unique characteristics of the dental setting, the risk of cross-infection between dental practitioners and patients is high in the absence of adequate protective measures, and dentists may develop severe anxiety in relation to the current pandemic. The limited provision of services and widespread closure of dental practices have raised concerns among dental professionals about the financial impact. The present study assessed the frequency of dental practice closure during the pandemic’s first wave in several countries and whether closures and their associated factors differ between the private and non-private sectors. Methods An electronic cross-sectional survey questionnaire was sent to dentists in several countries, from April to May 2020. The survey assessed professional, practice related and country-level structural factors elucidating the reason for practice closure. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess the association between practice closure and these factors, and differences were evaluated by sector type. Results Dentists from 29 countries (n = 3243) participated in this study. Most of the participants (75.9%) reported practice closure with significantly higher percentage in the private sector than the non-private sector. Greater pandemic-related fears were associated with a significantly higher likelihood of practice closure in the private (odds ratio [OR] = 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24, 1.92) and non-private (OR = 1.38, 95% CI 1.04, 1.82) sectors. Dentists in non-private rural areas (OR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.42, 0.81), and those in hospitals (overall OR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.36, 0.99) reported a low likelihood of closure. A high likelihood of closure was reported by dentists in the academia (OR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.23, 3.71). More hospital beds at the country-level were associated with a lower likelihood of closure in the non-private sector (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.46, 0.91). Private- sector dentists in high- income countries (HICs) reported fewer closures than those in non-HICs (OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.15, 1.93). Conclusions Most dentists reported practice closure because of COVID-19, and greater impacts were reported in the private sector than in the non-private sector. Closure was associated with professional, practice, and country-levels factors.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.