Suggestions for overcoming the barriers to critical thinking in nursing.

Nurses strive to provide the best quality of care to their patients in a stressful and constantly changing environment. Critical thinking (CT) could help nurses provide better quality of care to their patients. However, studies have shown that nurses either have low levels of CT or underutilize it during clinical practice. A possible explanation could be that nurses experience barriers during the development and/or utilization of CT. Since CT can be cultivated during university, nurse educators could utilize methods that improve CT. However, nurse educators do not sufficiently develop the CT of their students, since they usually rely on teacher-centered methods and not active learning methods. On the other hand, during clinical practice nurses cope with several barriers that inhibit their ability to use CT, such as: lack of teamwork, high levels of stress, time constraints, and understaffing. All these barriers decrease the utilization of CT and the quality of care that nurses provide. The present commentary suggests a simple strategy that could be used by educators and assist graduate nurses overcome the barriers to utilize CT during clinical practice. This strategy consists of three distinct components, namely: individual, interdisciplinary, and administrative. Each component could be used individually to improve the CT of nurses depending on the available resources and facilities. Nevertheless, educators by improving the CT of nurses could assist them in providing better quality of care.

Azathioprine is superior to budesonide in achieving and maintaining mucosal healing and histologic remission in steroid-dependent Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: The effects of azathioprine (AZA) and budesonide (BUD) on mucosal healing and histologic remission of Crohn's disease (CD) are insufficiently studied. In this prospective study we evaluated the comparative effects of AZA and BUD on endoscopic and histologic activity in patients with steroid-dependent Crohn's ileocolitis or proximal colitis who had achieved clinical remission on conventional steroids. METHODS: Patients were randomized to AZA (2.0-2.5 mg/kg a day) or BUD (6-9 mg a day) for 1 year. The study protocol included clinical examination, laboratory tests, calculation of the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI), completion of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), at baseline and then every 2 months for 1 year. Ileocolonoscopy with regional biopsies was performed at baseline and then at the end of the study to assess mucosal healing and the histologic activity of CD. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were randomized to AZA and 39 to BUD. At the end of the study 32 and 25 patients in the AZA and BUD groups, respectively, were in clinical remission (P = 0.07). The Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) score fell significantly only in the AZA group (P < 0.0001). Complete or near complete healing was achieved in 83% of AZA-treated patients compared with only 24% of BUD-treated patients (P < 0.0001). Histologic activity as assessed by an average histology score (AHS) fell significantly only in the AZA group (P < 0.001 versus baseline) and was significantly lower than in the BUD group at the end of the study (P < 0.001). Eight patients in the AZA group were withdrawn for adverse events (n = 6) or relapse of disease compared with 14 patients in the BUD group who were withdrawn for relapse of disease. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with steroid-dependent inflammatory Crohn's ileocolitis or proximal colitis who achieve clinical remission with conventional steroids, a 1-year treatment with AZA was superior to BUD in achieving and maintaining mucosal healing and histologic remission.

The long-term efficacy of azathioprine does not wane after four years of continuous treatment in patients with steroid-dependent luminal Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: The long-term effectiveness of azathioprine, in Crohn's disease (CD) patients remains a matter of debate. This study aims at assessing the effectiveness and safety of azathioprine in patients treated continuously for less or more than 4 years. METHODS: Patients with steroid-dependent Crohn's disease in remission on azathioprine (2-2.5 mg/kg) for between 2 and 8 years were assigned into two groups. Patients in Group A were being treated continuously for 2 to 4 years whereas patients in Group B for 4 to 8 years. Patients were followed every month for 1 year with physical examination and laboratory tests. Compliance with treatment was also assessed every month. Every 3 months the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) was calculated and the quality of life (QOL) Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) was completed. Colonoscopy with calculation of the Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) was performed at baseline and at the end of the study. The primary end point was relapse after 1 year. Secondary end points were safety of treatment, QOL, and endoscopic healing. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were included in Group A and 42 in Group B. The relapse rates per protocol were 19.6% and 11.9%, respectively (p: not significant). There were no significant differences overall and at each time point of the study between the two treatment groups regarding compliance with and safety of treatment, CDAI, IBDQ, and CDEIS scores. Multifactorial analysis did not identify any factor influencing the remission of disease in any patient group. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with azathioprine of steroid-dependent Crohn's disease is efficacious and safe.

A prospective randomized observer-blind 2-year trial of azathioprine monotherapy versus azathioprine and olsalazine for the maintenance of remission of steroid-dependent ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this prospective study was to assess whether the coadministration of azathioprine (AZA) and olsalazine is superior to AZA monotherapy in maintaining remission of steroid-dependent ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: Patients with steroid-dependent UC in remission were randomized to receive AZA alone (2.2 mg/kg) or in combination with olsalazine (0.5 g tid). Remission was defined as steroid withdrawal, an Ulcerative Colitis Clinical Activity Index (UCCAI) score of <2, an Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index (UCDAI) score of 0, and a negative colonoscopy and histology. Patients were followed in the outpatient clinic every month for 2 yr. The study protocol included 1) monthly clinical examination, assessment of UCCAI, hematological and biochemical tests, and compliance with treatment; 2) a sigmoidoscopy and completion of inflammatory bowel disease quality-of-life questionnaire (IBD-Q) and UCDAI every 3 months; and 3) total colonoscopy with biopsies at the end of the first and second year of the trial. RESULTS: Seventy patients were randomized to receive AZA alone (n = 34) or with olsalazine (n = 36). Three patients in each group developed side effects or could not comply with treatment and were withdrawn from the study. Three patients receiving AZA relapsed after the first year of the study and three after the second year of the study (19%). In the combination therapy group four patients relapsed after the first year of study and two after the second year of the study (18%). Relapse rates were not significant whether analyzed by intention-to-treat or per protocol. There were no significant differences between groups in time to relapse or discontinuation of treatment, UCCAI, UCDAI, or IBD-Q scores. However, the number of adverse events and the cost of treatment were significantly higher, whereas compliance with treatment was poorer in the combination therapy. CONCLUSION: Patients with steroid-dependent UC successfully maintained in remission on AZA are not in need of 5-aminosalicylic acid compounds.

Bone density patterns after normal and premature menopause.

OBJECTIVES: The investigation of the effect of time and type of menopause on bone mineral density (BMD) at different ages. METHODS: Five hundred and fourteen women, who had never received any hormonal substitution were studied in a cross-sectional design: 177 with normal (NMP), 210 with surgical (SUMP) and 127 with premature natural (EMP) menopause. Age at menopause was 49.1+/-3.9, 38.3+/-4.7 and 38.1+/-4.2 years (mean+/-1 S.D.), respectively. BMD was measured at L2-L4 vertebrae and proximal femur by the DEXA method. RESULTS: EMP women presented significantly lower vertebral BMD than NMP women in the 45-55-years segments (P<0.001), but did not differ from SUMP women. This group exhibited lower vertebral BMD than NMP between 45 and 50 years (P<0.001). Regarding femoral neck, EMP women exhibited lower values than SUMP in the 45-50 and 55-65 age segments (P<0.001) whereas SUMP women presented significantly higher BMD values than NMP women after 55 years of age (P<0.001). The percentages of women with vertebral BMD (T-score values) in the osteoporotic range were significantly greater in EMP compared with either NMP or SUMP groups (both P<0.001) whereas in femoral neck lower in SUMP than the other two categories. CONCLUSIONS: Women with either natural or surgical premature menopause exhibit lower BMD of trabecular bone compared with normal menopause women at the age segments 45-55 and 45-50, respectively. However, surgical menopause women exceed normal menopause women in their mixed bone BMD values after 60 years as well as premature natural menopause women at almost all age segments.

Budesonide versus mesalamine for maintaining remission in patients refusing other immunomodulators for steroid-dependent Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: To compare the efficacy of controlled-release budesonide capsules with that of mesalamine for maintaining remission and improving quality of life (QOL) in patients with steroid-dependent Crohn's disease. METHODS: Fifty-seven patients (25 men; mean age, 32 +/- 10.1 yr) with quiescent steroid-dependent Crohn's ileitis, ileocolitis, or colitis (Crohn's disease activity index <150) entered a prospective, investigator-blind trial. Patients were eligible for treatment with azathioprine but had not consented or had developed side effects. Patients were randomized to receive budesonide 6 mg/day (n = 29) or mesalamine 1 g 3 times/day (n = 28). Follow-up assessments were made every 2 months for up to 1 year or until relapse. At each visit, quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics between the study groups. The 1-year relapse rate was significantly lower in the budesonide group than in the mesalamine group (55% vs. 82%; 95% confidence interval, 12.4%-41%; P = 0.045). Patients assigned to budesonide also remained in remission longer (241 +/- 114 days vs. 147 +/- 117 days; 95% confidence interval, 32.7-155.3 days; P = 0.003). Compared with mesalamine, budesonide treatment also was associated with a better QOL throughout the study (mean total IBDQ scores 165 +/- 36 vs. 182 +/- 28, respectively; 95% confidence interval, -0.4 to 34.4, P = 0.0001). This advantage was confirmed in patients' self-assessed QOL scores. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 1-year period, controlled-release budesonide was significantly more effective than mesalamine for maintaining remission and improving the QOL of patients with steroid-dependent Crohn's disease.