The educational needs of people with systemic sclerosis: a cross-sectional study using the Dutch version of the Educational Needs Assessment Tool (D-ENAT).

The Dutch Educational Needs Assessment Tool (D-ENAT) systematically assesses educational needs of patients with rheumatic diseases. The present study aims to describe the educational needs of Dutch patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). The D-ENAT was sent to 155 SSc patients registered at the outpatient clinic of a university hospital. The D-ENAT consists of 39 items in seven domains. "Each domain has different number of items therefore we normalized each domain score: (domain score/maximum) × 100) and expressed in percentage to enable comparisons between domains." A total D-ENAT score (0-156) is calculated by summing all 39 items. In addition, age, disease duration, gender, educational level, present information need (yes/no) and information need (1-4; wanting to know nothing-everything) were recorded. Univariate regression analysis was used to examine factors associated with the D-ENAT scores. The response rate was 103 out of 155 (66 %). The mean % of educational needs scores (0-100 %; lowest-highest) were 49 % for "D-ENAT total score," 46 % for "Managing pain," 41 % for "Movement," 43 % for "Feelings," 59 % for "Disease process," 44 % for "Treatments from health professionals," 61 % for "Self-help measures" and 51 % for "Support systems." No associations between the D-ENAT total score and age, disease duration, gender and educational level were found. The D-ENAT demonstrated its ability to identify educational needs of Dutch SSc patients. SSc patients demonstrated substantial educational needs, especially in the domains: "Disease process" and "Self-help measures." The validity and practical applicability of the D-ENAT to make an inventory of SSc patients' educational needs require further investigation.

Measuring educational needs among patients with rheumatoid arthritis using the Dutch version of the Educational Needs Assessment Tool (DENAT).

The Educational Needs Assessment Tool (ENAT) was developed in the United Kingdom (UK) to systematically assess the educational needs of patients with arthritis. The aim of the present study was to describe the educational needs of Dutch patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by using the Dutch version of the ENAT (DENAT). The original UK version of the ENAT, comprising 39 items grouped into seven domains, was translated into Dutch according to international guidelines for cross-cultural translation and adaptation. The DENAT was then sent to a random sample of 319 RA patients registered at the outpatient clinic of a university hospital. For each domain (score range 1-5, equalling low-high educational needs), a median score with the inter-quartile range was computed. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine possible associations between educational needs and age, disease duration, gender and educational background. The response rate was 165 out of 319 (52%). The median educational needs scores were 2.5 for "managing pain", 3.0 for "movement", 2.0 for "feelings", 4.0 for "arthritis process", 4.0 for "treatments from health professionals", 3.5 for "self-help measures" and 2.5 for "support systems". Lower age and longer [corrected] disease duration were associated with more educational needs in the domain "support systems". In addition, younger patients had more educational needs regarding managing pain and feelings than older patients. There were no associations between gender or educational background and educational needs. The DENAT has demonstrated its ability to identify individual educational needs of Dutch patients with RA. The lower age and shorter disease duration were associated with more educational needs. The practical applicability of the DENAT needs further research.

Nurses' knowledge of pharmacology behind drugs they commonly administer.

AIM: To determine if nurses had adequate pharmacology knowledge of the drugs they commonly administer. BACKGROUND: Literature suggests that nurses have insufficient pharmacology knowledge. We also know that nurses and teachers of pharmacology are not satisfied with the amount of pharmacology taught in preregistration programmes in the UK. There is a lack of primary research on nurses' knowledge of pharmacology for the purpose of drug administration. DESIGN: We used a non-experimental causal comparative and correlational design. METHODS: We recruited a convenience sample of 42 nurses working in surgical wards of a foundation hospital in the North of England. Data were collected by structured interview and questionnaire methods. During the interview, the participants made a blinded selection of one out of four drugs they commonly administer and answered standard questions which focused on specific pharmacology knowledge. Their answers were given a score out of 10 (100%) to determine their actual pharmacology knowledge. RESULTS: The sample comprised of 18 (42.9%) junior nurses and 24 (57.1%) senior nurses. They had a median experience of 10.87 years postregistration. Their mean knowledge score was six ranging between two and nine (SD 1.9). Only 11 (26.1%) nurses scored eight or above and the majority 24 (57.2%) scored below seven, indicating inadequate knowledge. Knowledge of the mechanism of action and drug interactions was poor. There was a correlation between knowledge and experience. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that nurses have inadequate knowledge of pharmacology. The results will contribute to the evidence of nurses' knowledge of pharmacology in the UK. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study supports the need for supplementary pharmacology education for nurses in clinical settings, focusing on common drugs they administer. This will increase nurses' knowledge and confidence in drug administration and safer medicines management.