Orientation and mobility outcome measures

Despite orientation and mobility (O&M) being a significant factor determining quality of life of people with low vision or blindness, there are no gold standard measures or agreement on how to measure O&M performance. In the first part of this systematic review, an inventory of O&M outcome measures used by recent studies to assess the performance of orientation and/or mobility of adults with vision impairment (low vision and blindness) is presented. A wide variety of O&M outcome measures have been implemented in different fields of study, such as epidemiologic research and interventional studies evaluating training, assistive technology, vision rehabilitation and vision restoration. The most frequent aspect of outcome measures is efficiency such as time, distance, speed and percentage of preferred walking speed, followed by obstacle contacts and avoidance, and dis/orientation and veering. Other less commonly used aspects are target identification, safety and social interaction and self-reported outcome measures. Some studies employ sophisticated equipment to capture and analyse O&M performance in a laboratory setting, while others carry out their assessment in real-world indoor or outdoor environments. In the second part of this review, the appropriateness of implementing the identified outcome measures to assess O&M performance in clinical and functional O&M practice is evaluated. Nearly a half of these outcome measures meet all four criteria of face validity (either clinical or functional), responsiveness, reliability and feasibility and have the potential to be implemented in clinical or functional O&M practice. The findings of this review confirm the complicated and dynamic nature of O&M. Multiple measures are required in any evaluation of O&M performance to facilitate holistic assessment of O&M abilities and limitations of each individual.     

A COMPARISON OF KETOPROFEN SR AND SULINDAC IN THE ELDERLY WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

The elderly (age >65 years) are more vulnerable to side-effects induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). We therefore performed a double-blind comparative study of ketoprofen SR and sulindac in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis, 65 years of age or older. Sulindac was chosen because of its possible renal sparing effects, and ketoprofen SR because of its short half life and sustained release delivery system. Eighty patients were entered. More patients withdrew from the study due to side-effects in the sulindac group; both treatment groups had a high incidence of side-effects during this study and during previous exposure to other NSAIDs, demonstrating that the elderly are susceptible to side-effects from NSAIDs.     

Evaluating clinical educators: an employer's perspective

An Australian school of nursing's attempt to introduce an evaluation process required by management for clinical educators involved in undergraduate preregistration education is discussed Reliance on student feedback and clinical agencies' perceptions of the quality of teaching were seen as inadequate mechanisms for evaluation The evaluation process adopted incorporated observation of the educators together with self-reflection on their performance We conclude that post-briefings were poorly used and generally not reflective Educators relied heavily on their clinical skills and used a limited range of teaching strategies Whilst evaluation of clinical educators was time consuming and therefore costly, it is argued that it is essential to the integrity of the course The evaluation process has provided direction for support and development of clinical educators within the context of the curriculum     

The lived experience of clinical educators

This phenomenological study was undertaken to discover the everyday meanings which clinical educators of pre-registration Bachelor of Nursing students attached to their experiences as clinical educators The researcher employed a qualitative design using audiotaped in-depth interviews with four registered nurses employed as clinical educators in four different schools of nursing in Victoria, Australia Using hermeneutics, thematic analysis revealed five themes of meaning central to the lived experiences of clinical educators They are (a) being human, (b) having standards, (c) developing own teaching style, (d) learn as you go, and (e) not belonging The first three themes are described in the literature on clinical education, however, the latter two are unique to this research The results of this study indicate there is need for extensive preparation and on-going support of clinical educators The researcher, who is respectful of the enormity of the task which educators face in preparing students for practice, speculates whether clinical educators are the vanguards of student learning in the clinical field It is evident that the participants of this study did not possess many of the role requirements of clinical educators identified in the literature Further studies are needed which explore the link between student learning and clinical educator support     

Sun protective behaviors at an outdoor entertainment event in Australia

An observational study was conducted to examine the use of sun protective hats, clothing, and sunglasses of people attending an outdoor entertainment event in an area of high‐to‐extreme ultraviolet radiation in New South Wales, Australia. Armidale is unique, as it is a highly‐elevated area, almost 1000 m above sea level, and temperatures are often mild with very high‐to‐extreme levels of ultraviolet radiation. Four trained data collectors observed attendees as they entered the event, and recorded their use of sun protective hats, clothing, and sunglasses. While more than half of the attendees wore sun protective hats, only 14% wore sun protective clothing. Broad‐brimmed hats were considered sun protective, while sun protective clothing was defined by shirts with at least three‐quarter‐length sleeves. Females were more likely to wear both a sun protective hat and clothing than males, and children were less protected than adults. Legislative changes are required to ensure that organizers of outdoor events have a legal responsibility to provide a safe environment for attendees, including strategies to help reduce ultraviolet radiation exposure.     

How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study

Background

The English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme biennially invites individuals aged 60–74 to participate in screening. The booklet, ‘Bowel Cancer Screening: The Facts'' accompanies this invitation. Its primary aim is to inform potential participants about the aims, advantages and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening.

Objective

To provide detailed commentary on how individuals process the information contained within ‘The Facts’ booklet.

Design, setting and participants

This study comprised of 18 interviews with individuals aged 45–60 and used a ‘think‐aloud’ paradigm in which participants read aloud the booklet. Participant utterances (verbal statements made in response to researcher‐led prompts) were transcribed and analysed using a combination of content and thematic analysis.

Results

A total of 776 coded utterances were analysed (mean = 43.1 per person; range = 8–95). While overall comprehension was satisfactory, several problem areas were identified such as the use of complex unfamiliar terminology and the presentation of numerical information. Specific sections such as colonoscopy risk information evoked negative emotional responses. Participants made several suggestions for ways in which comprehension might be improved.

Conclusion

Public perceptions of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme information materials indicated that specific aspects of the booklet were difficult to process. These materials may be an appropriate target to improve public understanding of the aims, benefits and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening. These findings will contribute to a broader NIHR‐funded project that aims to design a supplementary ‘gist‐based’ information leaflet suitable for low literacy populations.