Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to J W Fullhart.
In order to conduct research, the first step is to find a topic to investigate. Although there is no scarcity of problems to study, selecting a topic can seem so overwhelming that action is stifled. With a nurse's knowledge and interests as starting points, however, there are some reliable sources for research ideas. This article describes several of these sources.
This study compared selected types of information given before sigmoidoscopy to determine if one intervention was superior to the other in decreasing anxiety. The design was two-group, pre- and posttest quasi-experimental. Anxiety was measured by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and heart rate monitoring. Preparatory information consisted of 3 to 5 min audiotaped messages. Subjects in a convenience sample of 22 men were randomly assigned to one of two information conditions, procedure (control) or procedure plus sensation (experimental). t tests and analysis of variance were used to analyze the data. Data analysis revealed no significant difference (p = .05) in anxiety between groups postintervention. There were no significant changes in heart rate between groups by time or within groups over time. Subjective comments on postsigmoidoscopy questions were strongly positive regarding the benefits of both types of preparatory information.
The purpose of this study was to describe the prevalence of health problems, use of protective attire, and health surveillance practices in a large group of healthcare workers exposed to glutaraldehyde. The results revealed that 37.8% of respondents reported at least one symptom/illness before exposure to glutaraldehyde. Nearly 60% of respondents reported symptoms/illnesses after glutaraldehyde exposure. Healthcare workers employed > or = 5 years tended to report fewer health problems preexposure and slightly more problems postexposure compared with all respondents. Surprisingly, smokers reported a nearly equal number of symptoms/illnesses both pre- and postexposure when compared with the total group. Approximately 95% of respondents always wore gloves, usually latex; 52% always wore moisture-proof outer wear; 28% always wore masks; and 55% always wore eye protection when exposed to glutaraldehyde. Those who used protective attire reported as many symptoms/illnesses as those who did not. Healthcare workers need to demand that the ambient glutaraldehyde level in the endoscopy cleaning area be checked periodically and records of these checks kept. Manufacturers need to produce more effective protective attire. Employers need to purchase protective attire for employees, and employees need to wear it until alternative endoscopic disinfectant/sterilization methods can be found.
Disinfectant surveys from responding members of the American Society of Postanesthesia Nurses were divided into two groups based on whether or not they considered themselves to be exposed to disinfectants in their work environment. Their survey responses were then compared with those obtained previously from members of the Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates, Inc., who were regularly exposed to 2% alkaline glutaraldehyde in the work setting. There were significant differences among the groups in the percentage of respondents who reported having headaches, eye irritations, respiratory problems, shortness of breath, rashes, memory loss, mood swings, and fatigue. These findings support the association of these complaints with 2% alkaline glutaraldehyde exposure. In contrast, there were no significant differences among the groups in the percentage of respondents who reported having asthma, rhinitis, chest pain, nausea, diarrhea, muscle/joint pain, visual disturbances, or dermatitis.