http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Mustaffa Khairu Hazwan,Shafie Asrul Akmal,Ngu Lock-Hock 한국간호과학회 2022 Asian Nursing Research Vol.16 No.3
Purpose: To compare patient care multipliers estimated from subjective evaluation against work sampling (WS) techniques in genetic nursing activities. Methods: An observational WS technique was conducted from November to December 2019 with nine genetic nurses in a tertiary referral center in Malaysia. The WS activity instrument was devised, validated, and pilot tested. All care- and non-care-related activities were sampled at 10-minute intervals within 8 hours of working over 14 days, followed by a subjective evaluation of activities survey over the same period. Bonferroni correction was undertaken for multiple testing with a p value of 0.0025. Results: The two techniques produced significant differences in genetic nurses’ activities categorization. The WS showed that compared with subjective evaluation, direct care (19.3% vs. 45.0%; p < .001) was estimated to be significantly lower, and indirect care (40.4% vs. 25.6%; p < .001) and unit-related activity (28.5% vs. 16.9%; p < .001) were higher. Both techniques produced a similar proportion of time spent in other non-care activities (12.0%) but differed in genetic meetings and information-gathering activities. While the multipliers for patient face-to-face contact were significantly larger between WS (4.57) and the survey (1.94), the multipliers for patient care time were smaller between WS (1.47) and the survey (1.24), indicating that caution should be taken when multiplying for patient contact time compared to patient care activity to determine the cost of care provision. Conclusion: A considerable proportion of time spent away from the patient needs to be allocated to patient-related care time. Thus, estimating the paid cost solely based on direct time with patients considerably underestimates the cost per hour of nurses' care. It is recommended to employ ‘patientrelated activity’ instead of the ‘face-to-face contact’ multiplier because the former did not significantly differ from the one estimated using WS.
Farooqui, Maryam,Hassali, Mohamed Azmi,Knight, Aishah,Shafie, Asrul Akmal,Farooqui, Muhammad Aslam,Saleem, Fahad,ul Haq, Noman,Othman, Che Noriah,Aljadhey, Hisham Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2013 Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention Vol.14 No.5
Background: Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) is an important aspect in identifying cancer patients' perceptions of being diagnosed with cancer and the assessment of treatment outcomes. The present study aimedto assess the profile and predicators of HRQoL of Malaysian oncology patients. Materials and Methods: A cross sectional study adopting the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) was conducted. All cancer patients attending Penang General Hospital between August-November 2011 were approached. Descriptive statistics were used to assess demographic and disease related characteristics of the patients. All analyses were performed using SPSS v 16.0. Results: Three hundred and ninety three cancer patients met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. The mean age was 53.9 ($SD{\pm}13$) years. The cohort was dominated by females (n=260, 66.2%). Nearly half (n=190, 48.3%) of the participants were of Malay ethnicity, practicing Islam as their religion (n=194, 494%). Two hundred and ninety six (n=296, 75.3%) had beene diagnosed with cancer within six months to 3 years previously. The most common primary cancer site was breast (n=143, 36.4%). The mean Global Health Status (GHS) score was 60.7 (SD=21.3). Females (mean GHS score of 62.3, p=0.035) with Malay ethnicity (mean GHS score of 63.8, p=0.047), practicing Islam as their religion (mean GHS score of 63.0, p=0.011) had better GHS scores. Patients having medical insurance had good scores (mean 65.6, p-0.021). Marital status was significantly associated with GHS scores (p=0.022). Bone cancer patientshad the lowest mean GHS score of 49.2 (p=0.044). Patients at very advanced stages of cancer featured a low GHS mean score of 52.2 (p<0.001). Conclusions: The present study identified many demographic and disease related factors which may contribute to the HRQoL of cancer patients, pointing to the necessity for improved management of disease symptoms and provision of psychological and financial support.