Fear and Stigma of COVID-19 Reinfection Scale (FSoCOVID-19RS): New Scale Development and Validation.

BACKGROUND: The advent of COVID-19 and its impacts have prompted fear and stigma among people all across the world. Because of stigma, there was often a delay in diagnosis and treatment, which resulted in a poor prognosis. As a result, a reliable scale is required to measure the level of fear and stigma of COVID-19 reinfection. AIM: To develop and validate a scale for determining the level of fear and stigma of COVID-19 reinfection. METHODS: A cross-sectional study including 200 nursing-college students who had previously tested positive for COVID-19 was conducted. The scale's reliability was evaluated by external and internal consistency methods. Construct, convergent, and discriminant validity were evaluated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). RESULTS: The scale's mean score was 24.85 ± 11.35, and no floor or ceiling effects were detected. The scale items' reliability, measured by Cronbach's alpha coefficient if an item was deleted, ranged from 0.76 to 0.95, with a total score value of 0.86. The range of convergent validity coefficients was between 0.37 and 0.64. Pearson's correlation coefficients for test-retest validity ranged from 0.71 to 0.93, with a total score of 0.82. The coefficient of split-half correlation was 0.87, while the coefficient of reliability was 0.93. According to the factor analysis, two components had latent roots larger than 1. The rotated component matrix of the two factors revealed that all items had R values over 0.30, indicating that none of them should be excluded. In addition, CFA results revealed that χ2 = 3524, df = 1283, χ2/df ratio = 2.74, p < 0.001, GFI = 0.86, CFI = 0.92, AGFI = 0.88, and RMSEA = 0.05. The scale's convergent and discriminant validity was confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: The 14-item, two-dimensional Fear and Stigma of COVID-19 Reinfection Scale (FSoCOVID-19 RS) was demonstrated to have reliable psychometric properties.

Empowering Self-Efficacy by Using Patient Empowerment among Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Pre-Post-Test Study.

Patient empowerment is increasingly acknowledged as a milestone of high-quality patient-centered care. This study was conducted using COPD Self-Efficacy Scale to determine the effectiveness of the patient empowerment intervention program among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients on self-efficacy. We employed an interventional design with a pre-test and post-test. Sixty COPD patients comprised the final sample of the study. The current study revealed significant improvement in overall self-efficacy factors among most participants. Statistically significant positive correlations were found between the total self-efficacy post-empower intervention model scores concerning age, sex, work, educational level, and marital status. The study's findings revealed that the patient empowerment intervention program positively affected COPD patients' self-efficacy.

Nurses' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Barriers Toward Pain Assessment and Management in Assir Region, Saudi Arabia.

Purpose:This study aims to assess nurses' knowledge and attitude towards pain assessment and management as an essential component of holistic nursing and patient care. Study Design: A cross-sectional descriptive design. Methods: A convenient sample of 282 nurses working in four health care institutions in the South region of Saudi Arabia was enrolled. The Knowledge and Attitudes Survey Regarding Pain tool was used to collect data from April-July 2021 through a web-based survey. Findings: The knowledge level and attitude of the nurses toward pain assessment and management was inadequate. The participants' correct mean score was (2.98). Forty percent achieved a passing score of 70%. Female nurses, postgraduate, working in medical-surgical units, had 5 to 10 years of work experience had higher knowledge and attitude levels. The barriers were categorized as patients, nurses, physicians, and system-related barriers. The most perceived barriers were nurses' shortage (76.2%); restricted opioids regulations (66.7%); and unavailable comfort measures as alternatives (59.9%). Conclusions: Inadequate nurses' knowledge and negative attitudes toward pain assessment and management is an alarming global concern. Healthcare administrators have to improve nurses' competencies through continuous education and training programs, adopt updated guidelines and eliminate barriers to achieve holistic patients' care including optimal pain control.

Incidence, Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Toward Needle Stick Injury Among Health Care Workers in Abha City, Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: A needle stick injury is a serious occupational health hazard in health care settings. Health care workers are at risk of bloodborne diseases and the psychological consequences of these injuries. This study aims to estimate the incidence of needle stick injuries among healthcare workers during the previous 12 months and to assess their knowledge, attitude, and practice toward these injuries. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted from 1st August 2019 till 15th February 2020, and included 786 healthcare workers in Abha city, Saudi Arabia. A structured questionnaire was used to collect the data. RESULTS: The incidence of needle stick injury among healthcare workers during the previous 12 months was (91/786) 11.57%. Nurses, females, and Saudis reported most needle stick injuries. More than half (52.7%) of the injuries went unreported. About 52.7% of needle stick injuries occurred during using sharp devices, and 42.9% of injuries happened in the patient room. The incidence of needle stick injury was significantly higher among those working at the secondary healthcare level (p = 0.003) and those practicing surgery (p < 0.001). Out of 786 participants, 94.7% knew the definition of needle stick injury, and 81.0% were aware of the procedure and guidelines to follow on sustaining a needle stick injury. Only 61.2% recognized that the recap of the needle is not recommended. Almost half of the participants (47.1%) agreed, and 33.6% strongly agreed that needle stick injury is preventable. A majority of healthcare workers (89.1%) had been vaccinated against Hepatitis B. Nearly 27.5% of healthcare workers incorrectly practiced recapping the needles with two hands and 8.7% bent needles before disposal. Recapping the needles was statistically significantly higher among healthcare workers who had a history of needle stick injury (p = 0. 046). CONCLUSION: Needle stick injury and its under reporting among healthcare professionals is still a prevalent risk. Raising awareness among healthcare workers and improving the reporting systems for needle stick injuries to ensure more protection and early use of post-exposure prophylaxis is required. Implementation of safety precautions and safe injection practices and providing engineered safety devices may further reduce the risk.