RESUMEN
AIM: The present study was conducted to determine the effect of education provided to first-year nursing students with the escape room game on their learning of parenteral drug administration. BACKGROUND: The use of escape room games in education supports formal education in providing students with professional knowledge and skills. DESIGN: A randomized controlled study design was used in this study. METHOD: The current study was conducted with 72 first-year nursing students. Data were collected with the Descriptive Characteristics Questionnaire (DCQ), Parenteral Drug Administration Information Test (PDAIT), Parenteral Drug Administration Sub-Checklists (PDASC) and Game Evaluation Form (GEF) between May and June 2022. The initial knowledge and skills of all students participating in the study were measured after completing the parenteral drug administration theoretical course and laboratory skills course. Students were assigned to the intervention (n=36) and control (n=36) groups by the stratified block randomization method according to their initial knowledge and skill measurements. Unlike the control group, the intervention group played the escape room game once in groups of four. The control group was allowed to work freely in the laboratory during this period. The final knowledge and skills of the intervention and control groups were measured immediately after the intervention. Students' skills were measured with an objective structured clinical examination. RESULTS: It was determined that the post-test knowledge level of the students in the intervention group and their post-test skill mean scores for drug withdrawal from an ampoule, subcutaneous injection administration, intradermal injection administration and intravenous push drug administration were higher than those of the students in the control group (p<0.05). Additionally, Intervention group students evaluated the escape room game positively. CONCLUSION: This study concluded that the escape room game supported formal education and could be used in teaching parenteral drug administration.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: In this study covering all of Turkey, we aimed to define cutaneous and systemic adverse reactions in our patient population after COVID-19 vaccination with the Sinovac/CoronaVac (inactivated SARS-CoV-2) and Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccines. METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional study included individuals presenting to the dermatology or emergency outpatient clinics of a total of 19 centers after having been vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccines. Systemic, local injection site, and non-local cutaneous reactions after vaccination were identified, and their rates were determined. RESULTS: Of the 2290 individuals vaccinated between April 15 and July 15, 2021, 2097 (91.6%) received the CoronaVac vaccine and 183 (8%) BioNTech. Systemic reactions were observed at a rate of 31.0% after the first CoronaVac dose, 31.1% after the second CoronaVac dose, 46.4% after the first BioNTech dose, and 46.2% after the second BioNTech dose. Local injection site reactions were detected at a rate of 35.6% after the first CoronaVac dose, 35.7% after the second CoronaVac dose, 86.9% after the first BioNTech dose, and 94.1% after the second BioNTech dose. A total of 133 non-local cutaneous reactions were identified after the CoronaVac vaccine (2.9% after the first dose and 3.5% after the second dose), with the most common being urticaria/angioedema, pityriasis rosea, herpes zoster, and maculopapular rash. After BioNTech, 39 non-local cutaneous reactions were observed to have developed (24.8% after the first dose and 5% after the second dose), and the most common were herpes zoster, delayed large local reaction, pityriasis rosea, and urticaria/angioedema in order of frequency. Existing autoimmune diseases were triggered in 2.1% of the patients vaccinated with CoronaVac and 8.2% of those vaccinated with BioNTech. CONCLUSIONS: There are no comprehensive data on cutaneous adverse reactions specific to the CoronaVac vaccine. We determined the frequency of adverse reactions from the dermatologist's point of view after CoronaVac and BioNTech vaccination and identified a wide spectrum of non-local cutaneous reactions. Our data show that CoronaVac is associated with less harmful reactions while BioNTech may result in more serious reactions, such as herpes zoster, anaphylaxis, and triggering of autoimmunity. However, most of these reactions were self-limiting or required little therapeutic intervention.
Asunto(s)
Angioedema , COVID-19 , Herpes Zóster , Pitiriasis Rosada , Urticaria , Vacunas , Angioedema/inducido químicamente , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Estudios Transversales , Herpes Zóster/inducido químicamente , Herpes Zóster/prevención & control , Herpesvirus Humano 3 , Humanos , Pitiriasis Rosada/inducido químicamente , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Turquía/epidemiología , Urticaria/inducido químicamente , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Vacunas/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Knowledge about the relationship between quality of life and self-care among patients with colorectal cancer in Turkey is limited. PURPOSE: This prospective, descriptive study evaluated the quality of life and self-care agency of patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer. METHODS: Patients were recruited to participate preoperatively from the general surgery clinics in 2 hospitals in Turkey. Sociodemographic variables were collected preoperatively, and the Quality of Life Scale for Cancer Patients (EORTC QLQ-C30) Turkish Version 3.0, the Quality of Life Scale for Colorectal Cancer Patients (EORTC QLQ-CR29), and the Self-Care Agency Scale were completed preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Thirty-seven (37) patients (average age 59.49 years [±10.84]) who met the inclusion criteria participated in the study. The majority were male (22 patients; 60%), and 25 (67%) did not have a stoma postoperatively. Compared with preoperative scores, QLQ-C30 general well-being, functional status, physical functions, and role performance scores decreased in the first month after surgery and increased in the third and sixth months (58.3 [preoperative] vs 75.0 [month 3] vs 83.3 [month 6]; P = .000). The preoperative QLQ-CR29 excretory system pleasure scores were higher than the postoperative third- and sixth-month scores (1.7 [preoperative] vs 1.0 [month 3] vs 1.0 [month 6]; P = .001). The Self-Care Agency scores at 6 months were higher than the postoperative first month (109.62 ± 11.62 vs 115.19 ± 14.22; P = .006). A positive correlation was found between Self-Care Agency scores and functional status scores of the QLQ-C30 scale at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (P = .000). CONCLUSION: Quality of life and Self-Care Agency scores decreased immediately after surgery but increased in the following 6 months. A positive correlation was found between quality of life and self-care agency.