Using Humor to Help Children With Pain

Humor has become a popular topic in health care recently. One of the suggested benefits is to help control pain. Although no scientific research to date has validated this effect, there is some theoretical and empirical support for the use of humor especially with children. Methods to implement the uses of humor in a clinical setting are suggested inappropriate uses of humor are also discussed. The need for scientific research is stressed.     

Reemergence of Positive Symptoms after Initial Response to Risperidone

Risperidone was effective in successfully treating a patient's negative symptoms of schizophrenia as well as reducing adverse effects from typical antipsychotic drugs. Auditory hallucinations reemerged after 8 months, however, and again after 24 months of risperidone therapy. Reemergence of psychotic symptoms after initial response might be explained by inadequate dosage, by the natural course of the patient's schizophrenia independent of drug therapy, or by the possibility that, for this patient, risperidone was less effective than chlorpromazine for the positive symptom of auditory hallucinations.     

Nursing Assessment of Altered Sexuality: A Review of Salient Factors and Objective Measures

TOPIC. Nursing assessment of altered sexuality.
PURPOSE. To review salient factors affecting assessment and objective measures available for use in assessment.
SOURCE. Literature specific to nursing assessment of sexuality and to instruments measuring altered sexuality.
CONCLUSIONS. Many standards of care include the assessment of sexuality, and nurses believe it to be an important aspect of care. However, the assessment of altered sexuality does not often occur in actual practice. The use of an objective measure of sexuality is recommended for both initial and on-going assessments in acute-care and community-based settings.     

Causes of Alcoholism: A Qualitative Study of Traditional Muscogee (Creek) Indians

Abstract Traditional Native American people are experiencing serious health, economic, and social problems resulting from alcoholism. Native Americans maintain a worldview of health and illness that conflicts with the dominant culture's approach to treatment. The purposes of this study were to describe the health beliefs of traditional Muscogee (Creek) Indians concerning the causes of illness and learn how these beliefs relate to alcoholism. The researchers conducted in-depth interviews of 55 traditional Muscogee (Creek) participants to learn traditional beliefs about illness and alcoholism. Data were analyzed using content analysis. Results indicate that both illness and alcoholism are perceived as having natural and unnatural (supernatural) causes. A challenge facing nurses is how to provide culturally sensitive care when clients' and nurses' beliefs about the cause of alcoholism may be in conflict. The authors discuss preservation, accommodation, and repatterning of health care beliefs as a basis for planning culturally sensitive nursing care.     

Evaluation of specialists'' outreach clinics in general practice in England: process and acceptability to patients, specialists, and general practitioners.

OBJECTIVES: The wider study aimed to evaluate specialists' outreach clinics in relation to their costs, processes, and effectiveness, including patients' and professionals' attitudes. The data on processes and attitudes are presented here. DESIGN: Self administered questionnaires were drawn up for patients, their general practitioners (GPs) and specialists, and managers in the practice. Information was sought from hospital trusts. The study formed a pilot phase prior to a wider evaluation. SETTING: Nine outreach clinics in general practices in England, each with a hospital outpatient department as a control clinic were studied. SUBJECTS: The specialties included were ear, nose, and throat surgery; rheumatology; and gynaecology. The subjects were the patients who attended either the outreach clinics or hospital outpatients clinics during the study period, the outreach patients' GPs, the outreach patients' and outpatients' specialists, the managers in the practices, and the NHS trusts which employed the specialists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Process items included waiting lists, waiting times in clinics, number of follow up visits, investigations and procedures performed, treatment, health status, patients' and specialists' travelling times, and patients' and doctors' attitudes to, and satisfaction with, the clinic. RESULTS: There was no difference in the health status of patients in relation to the clinic site (ie, outreach and hospital outpatients' clinics) at baseline, and all but one of the specialists said there were no differences in casemix between their outreach and outpatients' clinics. Patients preferred, and were more satisfied with, care in specialists' outreach clinics in general practice, in comparison with outpatients' clinics. The outreach clinics were rated as more convenient than outpatients' clinics in relation to journey times; those outreach patients in work lost less time away from work than outpatients' clinic patients due to the clinic attendance. Length of time on the waiting list was significantly reduced for gynaecology patients; waiting times in clinics were lower for outreach patients than outpatients across all specialties. In addition, outreach patients were more likely to be first rather than follow up attenders; rheumatology outreach patients were more likely than hospital outpatients to receive therapy. GPs' referrals to hospital outpatients' clinics were greatly reduced by the availability of outreach clinics. Both specialists and GPs saw the main advantages of outreach clinics in relation to the greater convenience and better access to care for patients. Few of the specialists and GPs in the outreach practices held formal training and education sessions in the outreach clinic, although over half of the GPs felt that their skills/expertise had broadened as a result of the outreach clinic. CONCLUSIONS: The processes of care (waiting times, patient satisfaction, convenience to patients, follow up attendances) were better in outreach than in outpatients' clinics. However, waiting lists were only significantly reduced for gynaecology patients, despite both GPs and consultants reporting reduced waiting lists for patients as one of the main advantages of outreach. Whether these improvements merit the increased cost to the specialists (in terms of their increased travelling times and time spent away from their hospital base) and whether the development of what is, in effect, two standards of care between practices with and without outreach can be stemmed and the standard of care raised in all practices (eg, by sharing outreach clinics between GPs in an area) remain the subject of debate. As the data were based on the pilot study, the results should be viewed with some caution, although statistical power was adequate for comparisons of sites if not specialties.     

Comparison of Health and Safety Executive and Cumbrian birth cohort studies of risk of leukaemia/non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in relation to paternal preconceptional irradiation.

In 1993, a case-control study by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) assessed the risk of leukaemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (LNHL) among children of fathers employed at the Sellafield nuclear installation in relation to paternal preconceptional irradiation (PPI). It concluded that the statistical association between risk of LNHL and PPI was confined to children born in the village of Seascale, where the dose-response was extremely high and very significant. In contrast, in 2002, a Cumbrian birth cohort study, investigating largely the same cases, concluded that this statistical association was not significantly different among children born inside and outside Seascale and estimated the dose-response inside Seascale to be much lower. This review makes a detailed comparison of the two studies, considering their design, data and analyses. The differences between their findings are due to: (i) differences in the distribution of offspring-years which are differential with respect to dose category and Seascale birth status, (ii) a non-Seascale high-dose case included in the Cumbrian but not the HSE study, (iii) differences between analyses using categorical and continuous PPI dose and (iv) the presence of Seascale controls with PPI over 200 mSv in the Cumbrian but not the HSE study.