ABSTRACT
Communication is one of the most essential needs of human beings.Mechanical ventilation compromises patients' ability to communicate their needs. This research was conducted to assess the effect of three methods of communication with patients receiving mechanical on their satisfaction in Arak hospitals 1389[2010]. This randomized clinical trial was conducted in Intensive Care Units of Valey Asr, Amir Al Momenin and Ghods hospitals in Arak, Iran. 60 patients who were admitted in ICU and were receiving mechanical ventilation were included in the study. These patients were randomly allocated in three groups.During a 12 hours period researcher used I method of communication for each group of these patients. These mrthods of communication included :A: Communicational board [words and letters]. B: Communicational board [pictures and letters]. C: The conventional method. Data were collected using a questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of three', parts: demographic variables, medical history and satisfaction with communication method.Validity of the instrument was assured by content validity index.. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine the reliability of the iinstrument. SPSS, version 16 was used for data analysis. There was not a significant difference among three groups in terms of age, gender, mean length of stay in the ICU before mechanical ventilation treatment. The mean satisfaction scores were 2.58. 3.83 and 4.10 for conventional communication group, communication board A and words and letters] and communication board B[pictures and letters] respectively. There was a significant difference among three groups in terms of their satisfaction with communication method [P0.00l].The one way analysis of variance indicated that using communication boards A and B significantly increased patient satisfaction. Using communication boards facilitates communication with mechanically ventilated patients and increase their satisfaction
ABSTRACT
Background: Intramuscular injection is one of the most important routes for medication
Purpose: This randomized cross-over controlled clinical trial was conducted to compare the severity of pain following intramuscular injection by Z and routine methods in patients at selected clinics in Tehran
Method: A Convenient sample of 90 men and women between 18 - 58 years old were selected. Subjects were randomly assigned to groups A and B. A demographic questionnaire, Mc Gill pain scale, and a numerical scale for seepage of drugs and blood were used to collect data. Patients were instructed to identify their pain by the 10-point McGill scale and the seepage of drug as well as blood was observed by the researchers and measured according to the numerical scale. The patients received a single injection of 1ml gentamycin in each method at a 30-minute interval
Results: It was found that there was no significant differene between the two methods in severity of pain and seepage [P>0.05]. Drug seepage in Z method was 0.19 - 0.39cc and in routine method, 0.31 - 0.51cc. There was no significant correlation between the body mass index of participants and pain severity or seepage in each method [P>0.05]
Conclusion: There was no significant difference in pain following the Z and routine methods. However, due to slightly less drug seepage in Z method, it is recommended