AimsTo explore and document the experiences and values of spouse caregivers of stroke survivors. To gain more in-depth knowledge of how the act of caring and the adaption process affects caregiving spouses.Materials and methodsPhenomenological, qualitative study. This study included spouses of stroke survivors who also served as primary caregivers. Individual, semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted, transcribed, and analysed using a thematic content analysis as proposed by Giorgi. Data was analysed and managed using Atlas-ti (version 7.0). This study was approved by our institution´s Complejo Hospitalario de Caceres Ethics and Research Committee.ResultsSpouse caregivers of stroke survivors undergo a process of disruption in their private lives and relationships, marked by their caregiving duties. The experiences of spouses caring for stroke survivors is condensed into topics and subtopics: “Caregiving and that´s all” summarizes the sense of having no life horizons and also caregiver impossibility of moving away from caring role. Otherwise, “Breaking the couple´s life together” enlightens the further consequences of stroke in couples shared live biography, which needs to be understood and rebuilt. Finally, “Going through the (non) loss alone” alludes to how spouses reinterpret meaning of loss, which is not appreciated by others and that refers to the balance between stroke survival and any acquired global disability.ConclusionsA comprehensive approach to the couple (family), from a psycho-socio-emotional and relational perspective, is essential for ensuring adequate quality of life for people who suffered a stroke as well as their caregivers. Spouses-caregivers must be considered as individuals living a transition process due to their unexpected disrupting change, which nurses should address through a comprehensive and integrated approach focused on transition care. Care resources must be adapted to the interpretation that the spouses have of their caregiving role and their relationship with the different components of the caregiving process.

ObjectiveTo quantify the association between the presence and type of drug detected and trauma recidivism in a cohort of patients admitted due to trauma.MethodA cohort study was conducted based on data from a project where the presence of alcohol and other drugs (cannabis, cocaine, amphetamines, methamphetamines, tricyclic antidepressants, barbiturates, opiates and benzodiazepines) was analysed in 1,187 patients aged 16 to 70 years admitted due to trauma. The patients were followed for a period of between 10 to 52 months until June 2016. For this study, the recurrence of injuries from a sample of 929 patients from this cohort was analysed according to their consumption profile. Survival curves were estimated and adjusted Hazard Rate Ratios (aHRR) and adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) were calculated.ResultsThe incidence rate of TR was 10.94 cases per 100 patient-years in the group of patients negative for substances and 27.99 per 100 patient-years in positive patients. The survival curves show very significant differences in cumulative recurrence-free survival between the groups (Log Rank: p<0.001). Both the aHRR and the aIRR estimates show an increased risk of re-injury due to alcohol consumption (aIRR: 2.33 (1.72–3.15), p<0.001), cannabis use (aIRR: 1.87 (1.09–3.20), p = 0.022) and polydrug use (aIRR: 2.34 (1.80–3.04), p<0.001).ConclusionsThe presence of alcohol and/or illicit drugs in these patients doubles the risk of trauma recidivism.

ObjectiveEstimate the effectiveness of brief interventions in reducing trauma recidivism in hospitalized trauma patients who screened positive for alcohol and/or illicit drug use.MethodsDynamic cohort study based on registry data from 1818 patients included in a screening and brief intervention program for alcohol and illicit drug use for hospitalized trauma patients. Three subcohorts emerged from the data analysis: patients who screened negative, those who screened positive and were offered brief intervention, and those who screened positive and were not offered brief intervention. Follow-up lasted from 10 to 52 months. Trauma-free survival, adjusted hazard rate ratios (aHRR) and adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) were calculated, and complier average causal effect (CACE) analysis was used.ResultsWe found a higher cumulative risk of trauma recidivism in the subcohort who screened positive. In this subcohort, an aHRR of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.41–0.95) was obtained for the group offered brief intervention compared to the group not offered intervention. CACE analysis yielded an estimated 52% reduction in trauma recidivism associated with the brief intervention.ConclusionThe brief intervention offered during hospitalization in trauma patients positive for alcohol and/or illicit drug use can halve the incidence of trauma recidivism.

No abstract

No abstract