1. |
- Angelhoff, Charlotte, medicine doktor, 1974-, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of skin-to-skin contact on parents' sleep quality, mood, parent-infant interaction and cortisol concentrations in neonatal care units : study protocol of a randomised controlled trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 8:7
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Separation after preterm birth is a major stressor for infants and parents. Skin-to-skin contact (SSC) is a method of care suitable to use in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) to minimise separation between parents and infants. Less separation leads to increased possibilities for parent-infant interaction, provided that the parents' sleep quality is satisfactory. We aimed to evaluate the effect of continuous SSC on sleep quality and mood in parents of preterm infants born <33 weeks of gestation as well as the quality of parent-infant interaction and salivary cortisol concentrations at the time of discharge.Methods and analysis: A randomised intervention study with two arms-intervention versus standard care. Data will be collected from 50 families. Eligible families will be randomly allocated to intervention or standard care when transferred from the intensive care room to the family-room in the NICU. The intervention consists of continuous SSC for four consecutive days and nights in the family-room. Data will be collected every day during the intervention and again at the time of discharge from the hospital. Outcome measures comprise activity tracker (Actigraph); validated self-rated questionnaires concerning sleep, mood and bonding; observed scorings of parental sensitivity and emotional availability and salivary cortisol. Data will be analysed with pairwise, repeated measures, Mann Whitney U-test will be used to compare groups and analysis of variance will be used to adjust for different hospitals and parents' gender.Ethics and dissemination: The study is approved by the Regional Research Ethics Board at an appropriate university (2016/89-31). The results will be published in scientific journals. We will also use conferences and social media to disseminate our findings.
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
- Olsson, Anneli, et al.
(författare)
-
Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction : a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Trials. - : BMC. - 1745-6215. ; 21:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: We aimed to assess the patient experience of informed consent (IC) during acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial. The original trial compared two anticoagulant agents in patients undergoing coronary intervention. A witnessed oral IC was required prior to randomization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, which was subsequently complemented with a written IC after percutaneous coronary intervention. Written consent was obtained before angiography in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Background: The IC process in patients with AMI is under debate. Earlier trials in this population have required prospective consent before randomization. A trial published some years ago used deferred consent, but the patient experience of this process is poorly studied.Methods: A total of 414 patients who participated in the main trial were enrolled and asked the following questions: (1) Do you remember being asked to participate in a study? (2) How was your experience of being asked to participate; do you remember it being positive or negative? (3) Would you have liked more information about the study? (4) Do you think it would have been better if you were included in the study without being informed until a later time?Results: Of these patients, 94% remembered being included; 85% of them experienced this positively, 12% were neutral and 3% negative. Regarding more information, 88% did not want further information, and 68% expressed that they wanted to be consulted before inclusion. Of the patients, 5% thought it would have been better to have study inclusion without consent, and 27% considered it of no importance.Conclusion: It is reasonable to ask patients for verbal IC in the acute phase of AMI. Most patients felt positively about being asked to participate and had knowledge of being enrolled in a scientific study. In addition they objected to providing IC after randomization and treatment.
|
|
4. |
|
|
5. |
|
|