Svår sepsis och septisk chock är sjukdomstillstånd som kan orsaka ett stort lidande för patienten genom att de är förknippade med hög mortalitet och morbiditet. Tidig identifiering och adekvat antibiotikabehandling är avgörande för prognosen. Detta ställer höga krav på ambulanssjukvårdens kvalitet. Ambulanssjukvården har behandlingsriktlinjer som ska utgöra beslutsunderlag och kvalitetssäkring för den givna vården. De potentiella vinsterna med en behandlingsriktlinje blir dock aldrig bättre än kvaliteten på behandlingsriktlinjen i sig. Studiens syfte var att granska och värdera kvaliteten på den svenska ambulanssjukvårdens behandlingsriktlinjer rörande patienter med misstänkt svår sepsis och septisk chock. En kvantitativ metod nyttjades och en totalundersökning av behandlingsriktlinjer i svensk ambulanssjukvård genomfördes, där respektive ambulansorganisation i Sveriges tjugoen landsting kontaktades. Svarsfrekvensen var 76%. Utav dessa kunde nio inkluderades i studien (N = 9). De erhållna prehospitala behandlingsriktlinjerna granskades därefter med hjälp av AGREE II-instrumentet. Resultatet belyser dels att flera organisationer helt saknar behandlingsriktlinjer rörande patienter med misstänkt svår sepsis och septisk chock (33% av alla tjugoen kontaktade landsting. 44% av de sexton som svarade) samt att de övriga behandlingsriktlinjerna har metodologiska brister i rapporteringen kring hur behandlingsriktlinjerna togs fram. Detta utgör ett hinder för att behandlingsriktlinjerna ska kunna utgöra den kvalitetssäkring de är avsedda att vara. Bristerna kan härledas till ambulanssjukvårdens organisation och skulle eventuellt kunna avhjälpas genom centralt utvecklade nationella behandlingsriktlinjer finansierade av vårdgivaren. / Program: Specialistsjuksköterskeutbildning med inriktning mot ambulanssjukvård

This thesis explored the concept of sport injury-related growth (SIRG). Specifically, the mechanisms through which growth occurs and how it may be promoted for injured athletes. Study 1 used a grounded theory methodology to develop a context-specific theory. Aligning with a Straussian approach, data was collected using semi-structured interviews and analysed using open, axial, and selected coding. Findings revealed that the mechanisms of (a) meta-cognition, (b) positive reappraisal, (c) positive emotions, and (d) facilitative responses are what enable SIRG. These mechanisms are influenced by a combination of internal (e.g., personality) and external (e.g., received social support) factors. These factors enable injured athletes to alter their perception of their injury into an opportunity for growth, and it is by drawing upon and mobilizing a variety of these resources that athletes are able to experience SIRG. Dimensions of growth were psychosocial, physiological, and behavioral. Although this study produced a theory that explains the SIRG process, it does not propose specific techniques or therapies that encourage the development of growth. To address this issue, Study 2 aimed to investigate and identify evidence-based interventions that promote growth after experiencing adversity. To achieve this aim, a systematic review was conducted on literature pertaining to the promotion of growth for populations who have undergone a stressful experience (e.g., medical illness). In total, 34 studies were located and obtained that met the preplanned inclusion criteria. Within these 37 studies, three types of interventions were identified: emotional processing, cognitive processing, and combined techniques. The authors of the studies who successfully demonstrated the promotion of growth either identified or suggested that growth occurs through the mechanisms of cognitive restructuring and/or reappraisal. Other important considerations that were identified through this review were the duration and timing of the intervention in relation to the adverse event, and the importance of the intervention meeting the needs of the participants. Although this study offers valuable insight into how growth may be more successfully nurtured, the studies included within this review did not specifically focus on promoting growth for injured athletes. Consequently, Study 3 sought to complement this study by examining the practice-based experiential knowledge of sport psychologists who have worked with injured athletes in an applied manner. In total, 10 sport psychologists were purposively sampled and interviewed. Data was collected using a semi-structured interview guide and analysed using content analysis. Findings revealed a fluid development framework that consisted of 5 phases: (a) reactionary phase, (b) preparation phase, (c) reflection phase, (d) application phase, and (e) monitoring phase. Within each phase a set of corresponding strategies, skills, and tools were identified that the sport psychologists would utilize to match the needs of the athletes. The sport psychologists also identified a number of personal and environmental factors that either promoted or hindered the development of SIRG. Altogether, this thesis supports and extends research regarding growth and sport injury, as well as offering applied practitioners useful information for promoting SIRG.

Orientador: Regina Paolucci El Dib / Coorientador: José Fernando Marques Barcellos / Coorientador: Ana Lúcia Vasílio Carneiro / Banca: Antonio Maria Jóse Cataneo / Banca: Paulo do Nascimento Junior / Banca: Eduardo Grossmann / Banca: Frederico Motta Gonçalves Leite / Resumo: A Colaboração Cochrane (CC) é uma organização internacional que tem como objetivo ajudar profissionais da área da saúde a tomar decisões clínicas bem informadas através da preparação, manutenção e promoção da acessibilidade às revisões sistemáticas sobre os efeitos das intervenções, sensibilidade e especificidade de testes diagnósticos em saúde e associação de fatores de risco e ocorrência de determinada doença. Entretanto, alguns estudos apontaram a constante ausência ou insuficiência de evidências nas revisões sistemáticas da Colaboração Cochrane para a tomada de decisão clínica. Verificar a proporção de revisões sistemáticas completas do grupo de Odontologia da Colaboração Cochrane que permitem ou não a aplicação prática dos resultados, cujos autores consideram reunir evidências suficientes para recomendá-las ou desestimulá-las. Estudo sistemático de revisões da Biblioteca Cochrane, edição 8, 2013. Foram incluídas todas as revisões sistemáticas completas do grupo de Odontologia que preencheram os critérios de inclusão deste trabalho.143 revisões sistemáticas foram analisadas, o que correspondeu a 100% da totalidade disponível na Biblioteca pertinente ao grupo de Odontologia da Colaboração Cochrane. Evidências que apoiam a intervenção 22,38% (95% IC 16 - 29); evidências contra a intervenção 6,29% (95% IC 3 - 10); ausência de evidências 71,33% (95% IC 64 - 78). O total de revisões sistemáticas que recomendam a realização de mais estudos foi de 140 (97,90 %) (95% IC, 96 - 100). A média do número de estudos incluídos foi de 13 e o total de meta-análises incluído nas revisões sistemáticas avaliadas foi de 161. Somente 28,67% das revisões sistemáticas completas do grupo de Odontologia da Colaboração Cochrane mostraram evidências suficientes para recomendar ou desestimular o tratamento de interesse e ainda, sugeriam novos ... / Abstract: The Cochrane Collaboration (CC) is an international organization that aims to help health care professionals to making clinical decisions well informed by preparing, supporting and promoting the accessibility of systematic reviews about the intervention effects, sensibility and specificity of diagnostic health tests and association of risk factors and occurrence of a particular disease. However, some studies indicated the constant absence or insufficient evidences in systematic reviews from the Cochrane Collaboration to making clinical decision. To determine the proportion of complete systematic reviews of the Cochrane Collaboration Dentistry Group which allow or not the practical application of the results, which author consider bring enough evidence to recommend or discourage them. Systematic study of the reviews from Cochrane Library, Issue 8, 2013. Was included all the complete systematic reviews of the Dentistry Group who met inclusion criteria for this study. 143 systematic reviews were analyzed, corresponding to 100% of all available of the Library pertinent to the Cochrane Collaboration dentistry Group. Evidences supporting intervention 22,38% (95% IC 16 - 29); evidence against intervention 6,29% (95% IC 3 - 10); absence of evidence 71,33% (95% IC 64 - 78). The total of systematic reviews that recommend further studies was 140 (97,90 %) (95% IC, 96 - 100). The mean of included studies was 13 and the total of meta-analyzes included in systematic reviews evaluated was 161. Only 28,67 of the complete systematic reviews of the the Cochrane Collaboration Dentistry Group showed sufficient evidence to recommend or discourage the treatment of interest and also suggested further studies, or be, none of them showed consistent results. In 71,33% of them still absence, failing to provide to the user the best way to making clinical decision in Dentistry / Doutor

Orientador: Paulo do Nascimento Junior / Coorientador: Regina Paolucci El Dib / Banca: Yara Marcondes Machado Castiglia / Banca: Rosa Inês Costa Pereira / Resumo: As revisões sistemáticas da Colaboração Cochrane visam oferecer informações atualizadas, objetivas e com evidências consistentes para a prática clínica e para o estabelecimento de políticas de saúde. Entretanto, verifica-se frequentemente uma inconsistência de evidências e incapacidade de gerar recomendações. O objetivo desse estudo foi analisar as revisões sistemáticas do Grupo Anestesiologia da Colaboração Cochrane e mapear sua utilidade para a prática clínica e para a pesquisa científica. Realizou-se estudo transversal com análise de todas as revisões sistemáticas publicadas no Grupo Anestesiologia da Colaboração Cochrane até fevereiro de 2014, verificando-se qual o tipo de recomendação para a prática clínica e para a pesquisa científica, por meio da análise das conclusões de seus autores. Os valores são apresentados em porcentagem e intervalo de confiança de 95%. Além disso, computou-se o número de ensaios clínicos e meta-análises por revisão sistemática. 115 revisões foram analisadas. Evidências que apoiam a intervenção, com recomendação para a realização de mais estudos ou sem recomendação para mais estudos: 32,2% [IC 95% 23,7; 40,7] e 2,6% [IC 95% 0; 5,5], respectivamente. Evidências contrárias a intervenção, com recomendação para realização de mais estudos ou sem recomendação para mais estudos: 6,1% [IC 95% 1,7; 10,4] e 1,7 [IC 95% 0; 4,0], respectivamente. Ausência de evidências, com recomendação para a realização de mais estudos ou sem recomendação para mais estudos: 57,4% [IC 95% 48,4; 66,4] e 0%, respectivamente. Do total, 95,7% das revisões sugerem a realização de mais estudos independentemente dos resultados obtidos. O número médio de ensaios clínicos nas revisões foi de 19,6, variando entre zero e 737 e o número médio de meta-análises foi igual a 9,3, variando entre entre zero e 92. A maioria das revisões sistemáticas do Grupo de ... / Abstract: Cochrane Collaboration systematic reviews aim to offer updated, objective and consistent information for clinical practice and in order to settle Health policies. However, inconsistence of evidence, as well as inability of raising recommendations is being observed. The aim of this study is to analyze the systematic reviews of Cochrane Collaboration Anesthesia Group and to map its use for clinical practice and scientific research. Methods: A systematic study was conducted, having the analyzes of all systematic reviews of Cochrane Collaboration Anesthesia Group until February, 2014, and then validating which recommendation for clinical practice, based on the author's conclusions, would be more suitable. Data are shown in percentage and 95% confidence interval (CI). Besides, the number of clinical assays and meta-analyzes per systematic review is demonstrated. Results: 115 systematic reviews were analyzed. There is enough evidence to support recommendation either with or without the need of more studies, as in 32.2% and 2.6% [CI 95% 23.7; 40.7], respectively. Evidences that were opposite to interventions, with or without the need of further studies, consisted in 6.1% [CI 95% 1.7; 10.4] and 1.7% [IC 95% 0; 4.0], respectively. Absence of evidence, with or without the need of other studies, was found in 57.4% [CI 95% 48.4; 66.4] e 0%, respectively. Of all, 95.7% of the reviews suggest that independently of the results, more studies are needed to be made. The average number of clinical assays in the reviews was 19.6, ranging from zero to 737, and the average number of meta-analyzes was 9.3, ranging from zero to 92. Conclusion: Most of the systematic reviews of Cochrane Collaboration Anesthesia Group results in lack of evidence or insufficient evidence in order to recommend interventions for clinical practice, thus highlighting the need of new controlled and randomized clinical studies / Mestre

A cobrança da sociedade pela melhoria da qualidade dos serviços de saúde implica na busca de ações pela enfermagem, para a implementação da Prática Baseada em Evidências (PBE), uma vez que a assistência, pautada em evidências geradas por meio de métodos científicos, pode contribuir para aumentar os resultados do cuidado de saúde. A utilização de resultados de pesquisas na prática clínica é um dos componentes da PBE, entretanto, ainda, é desafio para a enfermagem. Assim, dentre as ações que podem minimizar a lacuna entre o conhecimento produzido e sua aplicação, está a identificação de barreiras que impedem a interdependência entre pesquisa e prática. O presente estudo teve como objetivos gerais: realizar a adaptação cultural do instrumento The Barriers to Research Utilization Scale e analisar as propriedades métricas de validade e confiabilidade do instrumento The Barriers Scale, versão para o português brasileiro. Trata-se de pesquisa metodológica conduzida por meio das seguintes etapas: processo de adaptação cultural - tradução e retrotradução; validade de face e conteúdo - Comitê de Juízes; validade de construto - dimensionalidade e grupos conhecidos e análise de confiabilidade - teste-reteste. The Barriers Scale possui 29 itens distribuídos em quatro fatores, a saber: Fator 1 - Enfermeiro, Fator 2 - Organização, Fator 3 - Pesquisa e Fator 4 - Comunicação, com valores de respostas que variam de 1 (inexistente) a 4 (enorme), sendo que os valores maiores refletem maiores barreiras para utilização de resultados de pesquisas na prática. Os dados foram coletados em dois hospitais, por meio da aplicação de um instrumento para caracterização sociodemográfica e profissional dos enfermeiros e The Barriers Scale - versão para o português brasileiro, no período de outubro de 2014 a junho de 2015, com a participação de 335 enfermeiros. O nível de significância foi de 0,05. Os resultados evidenciaram que a maioria dos participantes era do sexo feminino (88,7%), com idade média de 33,9 anos, solteiros, mestres, com um único vínculo empregatício e em regime celetista. A maioria dos enfermeiros não havia realizado curso sobre a utilização de resultados de pesquisas, na prática clínica (85,1%), e desenvolvia ou já tinha conduzido pesquisas em enfermagem (68,4%). Na avaliação das propriedades métricas, a análise fatorial confirmatória demonstrou que a versão para o português brasileiro, composta por quatro fatores, está adequadamente ajustada à estrutura dimensional, originalmente proposta pela autora principal. A validade de construto foi determinada por grupos conhecidos, os resultados demonstraram diferenças estatisticamente significativas, sendo que os enfermeiros que atuavam em instituição, com cultura organizacional direcionada para a PBE, eram mestres ou doutores, tinham características favoráveis à PBE e identificaram menores barreiras para a implementação de resultados de pesquisas, na prática clínica. A confiabilidade, avaliada em intervalo de sete dias, indicou valores apropriados para o Coeficiente de Correlação Intraclasse, entre 0,75 e 0,84, e com diferença estatisticamente significativa. A avaliação da consistência interna demonstrou valor adequado para a versão para o português brasileiro de The Barriers Scale (? de Cronbach=0,92). Concluiu-se que The Barriers Scale, versão para o português brasileiro, é válida e confiável na amostra estudada / The society\'s demand to improve the quality of health services implies the search for nursing actions for the implementation of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), since care guided by evidence generated through scientific methods can help increase health care results. The use of research results in clinical practice is one of the EBP components; however, it is still a challenge for the nursing team. Thus, one of the actions that can minimize the gap between the knowledge produced and its application is the identification of barriers that prevent the interdependence between research and practice. This study\'s overall objectives were: to perform the cultural adaptation of The Barriers to Research Utilization Scale and analyze the metric properties of validity and reliability of the instrument The Barriers Scale - Brazilian Portuguese version. A methodological study was conducted through the following steps: cultural adaptation process - translation and back-translation; face and content validity - expert committee; construct validity - dimensionality and known groups and reliability analysis - test-retest. The Barriers Scale consists of 29 items distributed into four factors, namely: Factor 1 - Nurse, Factor 2 - Organization, Factor 3 - Research, and Factor 4 - Communication. The response values range from 1 (nonexistent) to 4 (massive), wherein the highest values reflect greater barriers to using research results in practice. Data were collected at two hospitals, through the application of an instrument for sociodemographic and professional characteristics of the nurses and The Barriers Scale - Brazilian Portuguese version, from October 2014 to June 2015, with the participation of 335 nurses. Significance was set at 0.05. The results showed that most participants were women (88.7%), with a mean age of 33.9 years, bachelors, masters, with a single job and under the Consolidation of Brazilian Labor Laws (CLT regime). Most nurses had not taken a course on the use of research results in clinical practice (85.1%) and were developing or had already conducted studies in nursing (68.4%). In the evaluation of the metric properties, the confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that the Brazilian Portuguese version of scale, consisting of four factors, is properly adjusted to the dimensional structure originally proposed by the main author. Construct validity was determined by known groups. Results showed statistically significant differences, and the nurses working in an institution with organizational culture directed to the EBP were either masters or doctors, had favorable characteristics to the EBP and identified lower barriers to the implementation of research results in clinical practice. The reliability, evaluated in seven-day intervals, indicated appropriate values for the intraclass correlation coefficient, between 0.75 and 0.84, with a statistically significant difference. The evaluation of the internal consistency demonstrated appropriate values for the Brazilian Portuguese version of The Barriers Scale (Cronbach\'s ? = 0.92). In conclusion, The Barriers Scale - Brazilian Portuguese version is valid and reliable as per the studied sample

The current study evaluated the implementation of evidence-based reading interventions using a multifaceted implementation measurement approach. Multilevel modeling was used to examine how three direct measures of implementation related to each other and to student academic outcomes and to examine patterns of implementation across time. Eight instructional groups were video taped weekly for nine weeks, and pre- and post-test assessments were given to 31 at-risk kindergartners from two schools using established evidence-based practices. Each implementation measure represented a different measurement approach (i.e., discrete behavioral measurement, global ratings) and focused on different aspects of implementation (e.g., structural, process, or multicomponent elements). Overall, results of this analysis indicated that (a) the implementation tools were highly correlated with each other, (b) only the multicomponent tool independently accounted for group differences, (c) together the multicomponent and process-oriented measures appear to account for additional variance in group differences, and (d) there were no significant trends in implementation across time as measured by any of the tools, however there were significant differences in trends over time between groups when using the structural measure. Implications for research and practice are discussed, including the importance of taking a multifaceted approach to measuring implementation and aligning implementation measures with program theory.

Orientador: Luciane Cruz Lopes / Banca: Juliana Alvares Duarte Bonini Campos / Banca: Jorge Otávio Maia Barreto / Resumo: Introdução: A busca da melhoria e sustentabilidade da qualidade da saúde, em sistemas públicos e privados, fortalece a necessidade da adoção de práticas de saúde baseadas em evidências (SBE) entre os profissionais de saúde. No Brasil, as percepções, conhecimentos e atitudes dos profissionais de saúde relacionados à SBE permanecem incertas. Conhecer como as práticas de SBE são implementadas, as barreiras e facilitadores para sua aplicação permite identificar quais são as necessidades educacionais e apoio para facilitar e promover a prática de SBE. Objetivo: Desenvolver e iniciar o processo de validação de um instrumento de pesquisa para avaliação da percepção, conhecimento e atitudes dos profissionais de saúde sobre as práticas de SBE. Método: Trata-se de estudo transversal de construção e validação de instrumento de pesquisa. Para selecionar os domínios a serem utilizados na elaboração do instrumento realizou-se a revisão da literatura científica. Utilizou-se a "Classification Rubric for Evidence Based Practice Assessment Tools in Education" (CREATE) como direcionamento para formulação do itens. Para a validação de conteúdo utilizou-se o método de Delphi, no qual, diferentes especialistas em SBE analisaram a representatividade dos itens em relação às áreas de conteúdo e à relevância dos objetivos a serem medidos. Para extração dos domínios efetuou-se a análise fatorial exploratória por meio da análise dos componentes principais. Realizou-se rotação ortogonal, segundo o método... (Resumo completo, clicar acesso eletrônico abaixo) / Abstract: Attempts to improve the quality of healthcare and make it sustainable in public and private systems support the implementation of evidence-based health practices (EBHP) among health professionals. In Brazil, perceptions, knowledge and attitudes of health professionals on EBHP remain uncertain. Knowing how to apply EBHP, as well as barriers and facilitators to their implementation, allows to identify the education and support necessary to facilitate and promote EBHP. Objective: To develop and start the validation process of a research instrument to assess the perception, knowledge and attitudes of health professionals on EBHP. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study for the development and validation of a research instrument. To select the domains to be used, the scientific literature was reviewed. The "Classification Rubric for Evidence Based Practice Assessment Tools in Education" (CREATE) was used as a guideline to formulate the items. To validate the content, the Delphi method was used, in which different specialists in EBHP analyzed the representativeness of the items for the content areas and the relevance of the objectives to be measured. To extract the domains, an exploratory factorial analysis was performed by analyzing the main components. An orthogonal rotation was performed by following the Varimax method. The appropriateness of data to this analysis was verified by using Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) criteria and through Bartlett's test. To confirm the extraction of the number of domains, the following criteria were followed: (1) eigenvalues >1; (2) factor loadings lower than 0,50 were excluded; and... (Complete abstract click electronic access below) / Mestre

No description available.

The child welfare system in the state of Tennessee has faced many challenges, including accessing best practice mental health treatment, particularly for youth experiencing traumatic stress. In response, five state-funded groups, who were created to provide support and consultation to the Department of Children’s Services, initiated a project to train agencies serving the child welfare system in the use of evidence-based treatment. The result of this multi-disciplinary collaboration, which included individuals from the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, was a state-wide dissemination and implementation program on the use of Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. The presenter(s) will briefly outline the development of the project; discuss gaining support in both urban and rural underserved communities; and share important lessons learned.

No description available.