Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
1.
Gac. sanit. (Barc., Ed. impr.) ; 34(2): 166-170, mar.-abr. 2020. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-196053

RESUMO

OBJETIVO: En el marco del proyecto SIVIVO se propuso la elaboración de una herramienta que facilitase la detección, el registro y la descripción de casos de violencia de odio y sus consecuencias sobre la salud. MÉTODO: Se utilizó el método Delphi a dos vueltas con personas expertas pertenecientes a los ámbitos clínico-asistencial, salud pública, investigación epidemiológica, académico, administración y organizaciones no gubernamentales para evaluar la pertinencia de diferentes ítems mediante una escala Likert de 1 a 5, y los resultados se presentan como medianas y coeficientes de variación. RESULTADOS: Las preguntas mejor valoradas, con puntaciones ≥4, y que componen la versión final del cuestionario, son las relativas a las características sociodemográficas de la víctima, el tipo de lesiones, la descripción del incidente, las motivaciones percibidas por la persona agredida, posibles evidencias de odio, la intención de denunciar y la percepción del personal sanitario del motivo de la agresión. El pilotaje mostró la adecuación de las preguntas finalmente seleccionadas. CONCLUSIONES: La incorporación sistemática de esta herramienta puede ayudar a conocer la magnitud y las características de la violencia de odio y su repercusión en la salud. Esta información permitiría elaborar estrategias de prevención e intervención dirigidas, especialmente, a los sectores de población más expuestos a este tipo de violencia


OBJECTIVE: In the context of the SIVIVO project, the development of a tool to facilitate the detection, recording and description of cases of hate violence and its consequences on health was proposed. METHOD: A two-round Delphi method was used with experts from clinical-care, public health, epidemiological, academic, administration and non-governmental organizations to assess the relevance of different items using a Likert scale, presenting the results with medians and coefficients of variation. RESULTS: The best evaluated questions, with scores equal to or greater than 4, and which make up the final version of the questionnaire are the relative socio-demographic characteristics of the victim, the injuries, description of the incident, the motivations perceived by the aggrieved person, possible evidence of hatred, the intention to denounce and the perception of the health personnel of the motive for the aggression. The piloting showed the adequacy of the questions that were finally selected. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic incorporation of this tool can help us to learn the magnitude and characteristics of hate violence and its impact on health. This information would allow the elaboration of prevention and intervention strategies aimed, specifically, at the sectors of the population most exposed to this type of violence


Assuntos
Humanos , Psicometria/instrumentação , Violência/psicologia , Ódio , Exposição à Violência/psicologia , Inquéritos e Questionários , Violência/classificação , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Técnica Delphi
2.
Gac Sanit ; 34(2): 166-170, 2020.
Artigo em Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31101332

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: In the context of the SIVIVO project, the development of a tool to facilitate the detection, recording and description of cases of hate violence and its consequences on health was proposed. METHOD: A two-round Delphi method was used with experts from clinical-care, public health, epidemiological, academic, administration and non-governmental organizations to assess the relevance of different items using a Likert scale, presenting the results with medians and coefficients of variation. RESULTS: The best evaluated questions, with scores equal to or greater than 4, and which make up the final version of the questionnaire are the relative socio-demographic characteristics of the victim, the injuries, description of the incident, the motivations perceived by the aggrieved person, possible evidence of hatred, the intention to denounce and the perception of the health personnel of the motive for the aggression. The piloting showed the adequacy of the questions that were finally selected. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic incorporation of this tool can help us to learn the magnitude and characteristics of hate violence and its impact on health. This information would allow the elaboration of prevention and intervention strategies aimed, specifically, at the sectors of the population most exposed to this type of violence.


Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Ódio , Inquéritos e Questionários , Violência , Adulto , Técnica Delphi , Etnicidade , Exposição à Violência , Feminino , Identidade de Gênero , Humanos , Masculino , Motivação , Projetos Piloto , Preconceito , Sexo , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Violência/prevenção & controle , Violência/psicologia , Violência/estatística & dados numéricos
7.
Enferm. infecc. microbiol. clín. (Ed. impr.) ; 31(10): 643-648, dic. 2013. ilus, tab
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-118180

RESUMO

INTRODUCCIÓN: Las enfermedades de declaración obligatoria (EDO) suponen un riesgo para la salud pública; por ello se encuentran sometidas a vigilancia y han de ser notificadas. Analizamos el conocimiento sobre las EDO en el ámbito hospitalario y su actitud frente a la notificación. MÉTODOS: Estudio descriptivo observacional mediante cuestionario escrito con 11 preguntas de respuestas múltiples, 2 con respuesta sí/no y una pregunta final abierta. Se entregó a médicos adjuntos y residentes de 19 servicios (médicos y quirúrgicos). RESULTADOS: Se entregaron 248 cuestionarios, con una tasa de respuesta del 79,84%. El 76,3% eran médicos adjuntos. El 29,5% identificaron de forma correcta como EDO el 100% de las enfermedades propuestas; el 3,2% no pudieron identificar ninguna de ellas. El 25,3% identificaron de forma correcta todas las EDO urgentes propuestas. Encontramos diferencias estadísticamente significativas para el conocimiento de las EDO entre los servicios médicos y quirúrgicos, tanto para adjuntos (p = 0,047) como para residentes (p = 0,035). Un alto porcentaje de adjuntos, tanto de servicios médicos (40%) como quirúrgicos (70%), refirieron no haber notificado nunca. Preguntados por las causas de subnotificación, el 72% desconocen si tienen que notificar, el 88% desconocen qué enfermedades tienen que notificar. CONCLUSIONES: A pesar de que muchos de los encuestados son conscientes de que la notificación de las EDO forma parte de su labor asistencial, reconocen que notifican poco, existiendo un conocimiento insuficiente sobre qué enfermedades tienen que notificar y el modo de hacerlo


INTRODUCTION: Notifiable infectious diseases represent a public health hazard, which is why they are under surveillance and must be reported. We tried to assess hospital physicians' knowledge of hospital physicians on notifiable infectious diseases and their self-reported attitudes to notification. METHODS: An observational study was conducted using a questionnaire with 11 multiple choice questions, two yes/no questions and one short-answer question. It was distributed to all senior doctors and residents in 19 medical and surgical departments. RESULTS: A total of 248 questionnaires were sent out, with a response rate of 79.84%. More than three-quarters (76.3%) of the respondents were senior doctors. As regards specific knowledge about whether a particular disease is a notifiable disease, 29.5% identified correctly 100% of the named diseases, 3.2% could not identify any of them. All urgent named notifiable infectious diseases were correctly identified by 25.3% of physicians. Statistically significant differences were found in the knowledge of notifiable diseases knowledge in medical and surgical departments, as well as for senior doctors (P=.047) and residents (P=.035). A high percentage of medical services (40%) and surgical (70%) department reported never failing to notify. When asked about the causes of under-reporting, 72% did not know whether notification was mandatory or not, and 88% did not know what diseases must be notified. CONCLUSIONS: Although many respondents are aware that diseases notification is part of their daily activity, many of them admit under-reporting. There is insufficient knowledge about what diseases are considered notifiable infectious diseases and how to notify them


Assuntos
Humanos , Notificação de Abuso , Notificação de Doenças/normas , Doenças Transmissíveis/epidemiologia , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Inquéritos e Questionários , Monitoramento Epidemiológico/organização & administração , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/organização & administração
8.
Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin ; 31(10): 643-8, 2013 Dec.
Artigo em Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23462466

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Notifiable infectious diseases represent a public health hazard, which is why they are under surveillance and must be reported. We tried to assess hospital physicians' knowledge of hospital physicians on notifiable infectious diseases and their self-reported attitudes to notification. METHODS: An observational study was conducted using a questionnaire with 11 multiple choice questions, two yes/no questions and one short-answer question. It was distributed to all senior doctors and residents in 19 medical and surgical departments. RESULTS: A total of 248 questionnaires were sent out, with a response rate of 79.84%. More than three-quarters (76.3%) of the respondents were senior doctors. As regards specific knowledge about whether a particular disease is a notifiable disease, 29.5% identified correctly 100% of the named diseases, 3.2% could not identify any of them. All urgent named notifiable infectious diseases were correctly identified by 25.3% of physicians. Statistically significant differences were found in the knowledge of notifiable diseases knowledge in medical and surgical departments, as well as for senior doctors (P=.047) and residents (P=.035). A high percentage of medical services (40%) and surgical (70%) department reported never failing to notify. When asked about the causes of under-reporting, 72% did not know whether notification was mandatory or not, and 88% did not know what diseases must be notified. CONCLUSIONS: Although many respondents are aware that diseases notification is part of their daily activity, many of them admit under-reporting. There is insufficient knowledge about what diseases are considered notifiable infectious diseases and how to notify them.


Assuntos
Doenças Transmissíveis , Notificação de Doenças/estatística & dados numéricos , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Padrões de Prática Médica , Estudos Transversais , Hospitais , Humanos , Inquéritos e Questionários
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...