Continuing education in the child health handbook: an educational software for primary care1

ObjectiveTo present, the process of development and evaluation of an educational software on the Child Health Handbook proposed for the continuing education of primary care nurses and physicians.MethodsQuantitative study of methodological development. For software development, the following steps were followed: definition of objectives; determination of the target audience; choice of pedagogical and theoretical reference for content; content selection and structuring; software development and evaluation by experts (five nurses and four physicians). All responded to an instrument that included four domains: pedagogical; content; functionality; system presentation and usability. The evaluation criteria were arranged on a Likert-type scale. The percentage of agreement and Content Validity Index were used for the quantitative analysis of the degree of agreement, considering a Content Validity Index cutoff point equal to 0.80.ResultsThe overall agreement index, calculated by the arithmetic mean of the Contents Validity Index of the evaluated domains, was 0.96, with scores ranging from 0.90 to 1.00. The average percentage of agreement of the experts per domain was 92.86%, with lower agreement in the content (80.95%), presentation, and usability (90.48%) domains. 100% of percentage of agreement was observed in the pedagogical and functionality domains among the evaluated specialists.ConclusionThe percentage of agreement, Content Validity Index and overall agreement index of the Child Health Handbook educational software in the context of primary care disclosed the software adequacy as an educational resource for continuing education of primary care nurses and physicians. Considering the assessed dimensions, it can also be used by other health professionals and undergraduate students.     

Prevalence and Predictors of Quality of Recovery at Home After Day Surgery

Traditionally, major complications and unanticipated admission/readmission rates were used to assess outcome after day surgery. However, in view of the relative absence of major complications the quality of recovery (QOR) should be considered one of the principal endpoints after day surgery. In our study, the level of QOR is defined by a combination of the Global Surgical Recovery (GSR) Index and the Quality of Life (QOL).The aim of this study was to analyze prevalence and predictors of QOR after day surgery on the fourth postoperative day.Elective patients scheduled for day surgery from November 2008 to April 2010 were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Outcome parameters were measured by using questionnaire packages at 2 time points: 1 week preoperatively and 4 days postoperatively. Primary outcome parameter is the QOR and is defined as good if the GSR index >80% as well as the postoperative QOL is unchanged or improved as compared with baseline. QOR is defined as poor if both the GSR index ≤80% and if the postoperative QOL is decreased as compared with baseline. QOR is defined as intermediate in all other cases. Three logistic regression analyses were performed to determine predictors for poor QOR after day surgery.A total of 1118 patients were included. A good QOR was noted in 17.3% of patients, an intermediate QOR in 34.8%, and a poor QOR in 47.8% 4 days after day surgery. The best predictor for poor QOR after day surgery was type of surgery. Other predictors were younger age, work status, and longer duration of surgery. A history of previous surgery, expected pain (by the patient) and high long-term surgical fear were significant predictors of poor QOR in only 1 of 3 prediction models.The QOR at home 4 days after day surgery was poor in the majority of patients and showed a significant procedure-specific variation. Patients at risk for poor QOR can be identified during the preoperative period based on type of surgery, age, work status, and the duration of the surgery.