ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Parents of children with cancer may experience posttraumatic growth (PTG). In clinical practice, this parental enhancement is more likely to be seen with a moderate-high PTG. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the moderate-high PTG prevalence of parents of children diagnosed with cancer at least 6 months and to investigate its relationship with hope, social support, and patient-parent characteristics. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted with the parents of children with cancer admitted to the pediatric hematology-oncology unit using the Parent-Child Characteristic Questionnaire, Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support and Dispositional Hope Scale. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the variables associated with moderate-high PTG. RESULTS: One hundred one parents were enrolled in this study, and the prevalence of the moderate-high PTG was 79.2%. There was a statistically significant difference between moderate-high PTG and children's age (P = .037). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that social support from significant others (odds ratio = 1.138, 95% confidence interval = 1.030-1.257, P = .011) was a predictor of moderate-high PTG. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-high PTG is common among parents of children diagnosed with cancer. Perceived social support from healthcare professionals and other patient parents is a predictive factor. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Interventions that encourage the support of health professionals and interaction with the parents of other patients, such as peer counseling, group-based interventions, and expanding the social support network, seem to be clinically promising in helping parents to improve from the cancer experience.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: To determine whether nurses respect or violate patient privacy by comparing nurses' and patients' opinions. BACKGROUND: Although nurses want to respect patient privacy, they can sometimes violate patient privacy or not pay enough attention. METHOD: This comparative and cross-sectional study was conducted with 357 patients and 305 nurses in 12 public hospitals in Trabzon, Turkey. Data were collected with an information form and the Patient Privacy Scale. Reporting is consistent with the STROBE checklist for cross-sectional studies. RESULTS: The total mean score of the patient privacy scale was 4.6 ± 0.39 for nurses and 4.5 ± 0.41 for patients, and no significant difference was found between their scores (U = 52999.0; p = .554). Further, the nurses (U = 14358.0; p = .000) and the patients (U = 13272.5; p = .006) in the public hospitals had statistically significantly higher overall privacy scores than those in the training and research hospitals. The overall privacy scale scores were higher and more statistically significant in the patients hospitalised in surgical clinics than those hospitalised in clinics for internal diseases (U = 8514.0; p = .005) and in single compared to married patients (U = 12364.5; p = .034). CONCLUSION: Nurses respected patient privacy highly according to both nurses and patients, and there was no significant difference between their views. However, nurses working in training and research hospitals and internal diseases clinics need to improve their approaches to patient privacy. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The results of this study could be used to reduce patient privacy vulnerabilities in complex hospitals and clinics such as training and research hospitals and to improve institutional policies and activities regarding patient privacy. By comparing the results of patients and nurses, the study provided more consistent and accurate data about patient privacy.
