ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Palliative care knowledge is essential in primary healthcare due to the increasing number of patients who require attention in the final stage of their life. Health professionals (physicians and nurses) need to acquire specific knowledge and abilities to provide high-quality palliative care. The development of education programmes in palliative care is necessary. The Palliative Care Knowledge Test (PCKT) is a questionnaire that evaluates the basic knowledge about palliative care, but it has not been adapted into Spanish, and its effectiveness and utility for Spanish culture have not been analysed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report the translation into Spanish and a psychometric analysis of the PCKT. METHODS: The questionnaire survey was validated with a group of 561 physicians and nurses. The PCKT Spanish Version (PCKT-SV) was obtained from a process, including translation, back translation and revision by experts and a pilot study. The content validity and reliability of the questionnaire were analysed. RESULTS: The results showed internal consistency and reliability indexes similar to those obtained by the original version of PCKT. CONCLUSION: The PCKT-SV is a useful instrument for measuring Spanish-speaking physician and nurse knowledge of palliative care, and it is suitable to evaluate the effectiveness of training activities in palliative care.
Subject(s)
Palliative Care , Physicians , Clinical Competence , Cross-Cultural Comparison , Humans , Palliative Care/methods , Pilot Projects , Psychometrics/methods , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
The increase in life expectancy has led to a growth in the number of people in need of palliative care. Health professionals must possess appropriate knowledge and skills. This study aimed to assess knowledge in palliative care through the Palliative Care Knowledge Test Spanish Version (PCKT-SV)®. A cross-sectional analytical study was conducted in 40 primary care health services. A total of 600 PCKT-SV questionnaires were distributed among health professionals; 561 of them (226 nurses and 335 physicians) were properly filled up. Sociodemographic information, education, and work experience were also recorded. A total of 34.41% of the nurses and 67.40% of the physicians showed good or excellent knowledge of palliative care. Physicians' scores for pain, dyspnea, and psychiatric disorders were higher than those of the nurses. Nurses scored significantly better in philosophy. Professionals with continuous training in palliative care showed a higher level of knowledge. Age and work experience of physicians and undergraduate training in nurses had significant weight in knowledge. Developing continuous training and enhancing undergraduate training in palliative care will lead to improved patient care at the end of life.
Subject(s)
Nurses , Physicians , Clinical Competence , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Palliative Care , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJETIVO: evaluar el efecto de la intervención educativa enfermera en el manejo de dispositivos de inhalación. MÉTODO: ensayo controlado y aleatorizado en el Centro de Salud de Vistabella (Murcia) (70 sujetos en el grupo control (GC) y 69 en el grupo intervención (GI)) sobre pacientes con enfermedad respiratoria que cursa con obstrucción crónica del flujo aéreo. En el GI se realizó un adiestramiento hasta que el paciente lo hizo de forma correcta, y posteriormente se le entregó material escrito de apoyo; en el GC solo se les dio la información escrita. A los tres meses se efectuó la medición de evaluación. Se consideró como técnica inhalatoria aceptable realizar una inspiración profunda y apnea de 10 segundos. En el tratamiento y análisis de los datos se empleó el test de McNemar para datos apareados (antes y después de la intervención) y Chi-cuadrado en el contraste de hipótesis de datos apareados (medición postintervención). RESULTADOS: el porcentaje de realización aceptable de la técnica con el inhalador presurizado fue el que tuvo un mayor incremento entre antes y después de la intervención (antes: 13,5%, después: 703%; p = 0,001), aunque también se produjo un incremento significativo (p < 0,05) en el Turbuhaler® y Accuhaler®. En la comparación postintervención, en el grupo control un 49,1% (n= 27) realizaba la técnica de forma aceptable, y en el grupo intervención, un 93,3% (n= 56), siendo una diferencia estadísticamente significativa (p< 0,05). CONCLUSIÓN: el adiestramiento en el manejo de dispositivos de inhalación, junto con información escrita de apoyo, mejora la técnica empleada por el paciente, frente a entregar solo información escrita
OBJECTIVE: to assess the effect of educational intervention on the use of inhalation devices, METHOD: a controlled and randomized clinical trial at the Vistabella (Murcia) Health Centre, on patients with respiratory disease presenting a chronic obstruction in air flow (70 patients in the Control Arm (CA) and 69 in the Intervention Arm (AI)). The patients in the IA received training until they could do it adequately, and subsequently they were provided with support written materials; patients in the CA only received written information. At three months, the assessment measurement was conducted. A deep inhalation and 10-second apnea was considered an acceptable inhalation technique. For data treatment and analysis, McNemar Test for paired data was used (before and after the intervention), and Chi-Square Test was used for hypothesis contrast (post-intervention measurement). RESULTS: the proportion of acceptable use of the technique with the pressurized inhaler was the one with a higher increase after the intervention (before: 13.5%, after: 703%; p= 0.001), though there was also a significant increase (p< 0.05) for the Turbuhaler and Accuhaler. In the post-intervention comparison, 49.1% (n= 27) of patients in the control arm conducted the technique in an acceptable manner, vs. 93.3% (n= 56) in the intervention group; and this represented a statistically significant difference (p< 0.05). CONCLUSION: training in the use of inhalation devices, together with support written information, will improve the technique used by the patient, vs. only providing written information
