Effectiveness of a program in nursing interventions to poor knowledge of family caregivers of people undergoing rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been considered the most important cause of disability among young people and the most common cause of neurological morbidity. It is therefore necessary that health professionals, including nurses, develop specific knowledge about the assistance not only to the victims but also to the caregivers in order to help them cope with the adverse consequences arising from this type of trauma. In the rehabilitation context, there is little research on the clinical management of people with TBI in rehabilitation process and even the use of Models or Nursing Theories to approach to this group. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of a program in nursing interventions for "Knowledge deficit of family caregivers" of people with TBI rehabilitation sequel. It followed the methodology of convergent care research (PCA), a quantitative approach. The study was developed in the hospital sector of the Rehabilitation Center and Readaptation Dr. Henry Santillo (CRER) in the city of Goiânia/GO through August 2012 to January 2013. The study included eight people with TBI, V ranch or superior, who were hospitalized in the period of the study and their caregivers. During data collection a set of instruments and procedures were used. In the evaluation of people with TBI, a protocol interview and physical examination based on the Theory of Orem were used. In the assessment of family caregivers it was applied a structured interview based on the Calgary Assessment Model and Families Intervention, a cognitic assessment using the Mini-Mental State Examination and anxiety assessment by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Based on this initial assessment of patients and their family caregivers, it was developed knowledge evaluation protocols necessary to caregivers with specific focus such as: facilitation of communication, memory training, cognitive stimulation and disease process. The rating scales were inspired by NOC. Then, a program of individual and group intervention was applied to the family caregivers based on NIC (individual and group learning, learning: the health illness process) and in the Learning Theory significant. At the end of the specific intervention program, 72 hours were waited and knowledge post-intervention tests were applied. Sociodemographic data analysis was done by simple descriptive statistics. The diagnoses were identified by consensus of two professionals and checked by a third researcher. To evaluate the results it was used the scores of the NOC indicators (Nursing Outcomes Classifications) and made a comparison of the data obtained before and after 72 hours of interventions through the use of Descartes signals test. The interventions protocol for poor knowledge was effective for training Memory (p = 0.008) and instruction: disease process (p = 0.008). Despite positive clinically results, the program effectiveness of interventions for cognitive stimulation (p = 0.07) and communication improvement (p = 0.12) they could not be statistically proven. Based on these results, it was possible to: highlight the success of intervention program for the diagnosis of insufficient knowledge of the family caregiver training on memory and on the disease process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".