[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In spite of the negative health effects of waterpipe tobacco smoking, its use is becoming more common. The objective of this study is to systematically review the medical literature for motives, beliefs and attitudes towards waterpipe tobacco smoking.
We electronically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the ISI the Web of Science in January 2012. We included both quantitative and qualitative studies. We selected studies and abstracted data using standard systematic review methodology. We synthesized data qualitatively.
We included 58 papers reporting on 56 studies. The main motives for waterpipe tobacco smoking were socializing, relaxation, pleasure and entertainment. Peer pressure, fashion, and curiosity were additional motives for university and school students while expression of cultural identity was an additional motive for people in the Middle East and for people of Middle Eastern descent in Western countries. Awareness of the potential health hazards of waterpipe smoking was common across settings. Most but not all studies found that the majority of people perceived waterpipe smoking as less harmful than cigarette smoking. Waterpipe smoking was generally socially acceptable and more acceptable than cigarette smoking in general. In Middle Eastern societies, it was particularly more acceptable for women's use compared to cigarette use. A majority perceived waterpipe smoking as less addictive than cigarette smoking. While users were confident in their ability to quit waterpipe smoking at any time, willingness to quit varied across settings.
Socializing, relaxation, pleasure and entertainment were the main motives for waterpipe use. While waterpipe users were aware of the health hazards of waterpipe smoking, they perceived it as less harmful, less addictive and more socially acceptable than cigarette smoking and were confident about their ability to quit.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Negative healthcare provider attitudes toward patients with physical disabilities may challenge the delivery of quality care to patients. The objective of this study was to systematically review published studies examining the attitudes of healthcare students and professionals toward patients with physical disabilities.
In October 2011, we searched four electronic databases using the OVID platform. In addition, we screened citation lists. Independent reviewers completed the selection of articles and data abstraction by triplicate review using standardized and pilot tested forms. They resolved disagreements by discussion or with the help of an additional reviewer when necessary. Articles were included if they examined healthcare professionals' and students' attitudes toward patients with physical disabilities. We did not perform a meta-analysis because of the variation in instruments used and variables examined. We used a qualitative approach to identifying and reporting common findings across the studies.
Results indicate that healthcare students and professionals have favorable attitudes toward persons with physical disabilities. More experience with persons with physical disabilities, both professionally and socially, was associated with more favorable attitudes. In addition, female healthcare students and professionals were found to have more positive attitudes toward patients with physical disabilities than do their male colleagues. Limited evidence exists examining the influence of age, race or ethnicity, and rank of student or professional on attitudes toward patients with physical disabilities. Finally, it was found that healthcare students and professionals reported overall more favorable attitudes than did individuals in non-healthcare professions.
Overall, healthcare students' and professionals' attitudes toward persons with physical disabilities were favorable. However, some studies revealed the possibility that some healthcare providers demonstrate fear and anxiety with the challenge of caring for a patient with physical disabilities. Some of the factors associated with providers' attitudes toward patients with physical disabilities are potentially modifiable (e.g., experience) and could be the target of educational interventions to ameliorate this fear and facilitate higher quality care.
American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation / Association of Academic Physiatrists 06/2012; 91(6):533-45. · 1.56 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Instruments to detect changes in attitudes towards people with disabilities are important for evaluation of training programs and for research. While we were interested in instruments specific for medical students, we aimed to systematically review the medical literature for validated survey instruments used to measure attitudes of healthcare students and professionals towards patients with physical disability.
We electronically searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Health and Psychosocial Instruments. We included papers reporting on the development and/or validation of survey instruments to measure attitudes of healthcare students and professionals towards patients with physical disability. We excluded papers in which the attitudes were not measured in a provider-patient context. Two reviewers carried out titles and abstracts screening, full texts screening, and data abstraction in a duplicate and independent manner using standardized and pilot tested forms.
We identified seven validated survey instruments used for healthcare students and professionals. These instruments were originally developed for the following target populations: general population (n = 4); dental students (n = 1); nursing students (n = 1); and rehabilitation professionals (n = 1). The types of validity reported for these instruments were content validity (n = 3), criterion-related validity (n = 1), construct validity (n = 2), face validity (n = 1), discriminant validity (n = 1), and responsiveness (n = 1). The most widely validated and used tool (ATDP) was developed in the late 1960s while the most recent instrument was developed in the early 1990s.
Of the seven identified validated instruments, less than half were specifically designed for healthcare students and professionals and none for medical students. There is a need to develop and validate a contemporary instrument specifically for medical students.
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 11/2010; 7:55. · 2.62 Impact Factor