• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• 제17권8호
• /
• pp.3769-3776
• /
• 2016

Background: Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths among women worldwide. High breast cancer mortality has been attributed to lack of public awareness of the disease. Little is known about the level of knowledge of breast cancer in Central African Republic. This study aimed to investigate the knowledge of health professionals on breast cancer. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among 158 health professionals (27 medical; 131 paramedical) in 17 hospitals in Bangui using a self-administered questionnaire. Descriptive statistical analysis, Person's ${\chi}^2$ test and ANOVA were applied to examine associations between variables with p < 0.05 being considered significant. Results: Data analyzed using SPSS version 20 indicates that average knowledge about breast cancer perception of the entire population was 47.6%, diagnosis method 45.5%, treatment 34.3% and risk factors 23.8%. Most respondents (65.8%) agreed that breast cancer is important in Central African Republic and that family history is a risk factor (44.3%). Clinical assessments and mammography were considered most suitable diagnostic methods, and surgery as the best treatment. The knowledge level was significantly higher among medical than paramedical staff with regard to risk factors, diagnosis and treatment. However the trainee group had very high significant differences of knowledge compared with all other groups. Conclusions: There is a very urgent need to update the various training programs for these professionals, with recommendations of retraining. Health authorities must create suitable structures for the overall management of cancer observed as a serious public health problem.

• 한국산학기술학회논문지
• /
• 제16권4호
• /
• pp.2691-2703
• /
• 2015

본 연구는 중환자실 간호사들의 DNR에 대한 윤리적 문제의 인식과 태도를 파악하여 DNR 환자간호에 도움이 되는 기초자료로 활용하고자 시도하였다. G광역시 상급종합병원 1개소, 전라 남 북도 700병상이상 종합병원 각각 1개소 중환자실에 근무하는 간호사를 대상으로 2014년 8월 1일 부터 9월 5일까지 설문조사하여 154부를 최종분석 하였다. 첫째, DNR 결정 태도는 치료를 거부하는 환자의견에 반대, 예후가 좋지 않은 환자라도 생명의 연장에 찬성, 환자가 원했을 경우 어떠한 상태라도 DNR 미실시, 보호자의 요구에 의한 치료와 가망 없는 환자의 CPR실시에 반대하였다. 둘째, 환자가족에 의한 인공호흡기 및 다른 치료의 적극적 실시에 반대, 보호자의 중환자실 입실에 대립적인 입장을 보였다. DNR 환자에 대해 의사의 인공호흡기의 소극적 사용에 찬성, 환자의 신체적 심리적 안정을 위해 기본적인 간호도 줄여야 하고, 무균술을 지키지 않은 처치에 묵인하는 입장이며, 가족에 의한 환자의 상태변화를 주치의에게 여러 차례 보고하는 것에 반대하였다. 셋째, 의사의 관심감소를 인정하고, 이에 보호자의 항의가 있을 때 의료팀을 옹호하며, DNR 결정을 주치의가 내린 것에 대립적인 입장이며, DNR 지침에 따른 결정에 반대하였다. 예후가 좋지 않은 환자에게 그대로 설명하는 것에 반대 또는 중립적이며, 환자나 보호자에게 환자상태를 있는 그대로 설명하는 것과 사망에 가까운 경우 환자나 보호자에게 상태를 그대로 설명하는 것에 반대하였다. 결론적으로 DNR 주체는 환자이며, 환자의견이 충분히 반영 되어야 하며, 의료행위의 범위와 결정과정에서의 갈등을 최소화하고 환자중심의 윤리적 의사결정이 되도록 DNR 결정에 대한 표준과 지침이 필요하며, 충분한 설명을 근거로 한 동의가 이루어 져야하겠다.

• 치위생과학회지
• /
• 제9권4호
• /
• pp.469-474
• /
• 2009

본 연구는 서울, 경기에 거주하고 있는 치면열구전색을 자녀에게 해 준 경험이 있는 초등학생 학부모들의 치면열구전색에 관한 만족도를 알아보기 위해 일부지역 초등학생 학부모 231명을 대상으로 2008년 10월부터 11월까지 설문조사를 한 후 그 결과를 분석하여 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 1. 치면열구전색을 시술받은 곳은 치과의원 48.1%, 치과병원 38.1%로 나타났으며, 치과의사에게 시술받았다는 대상자는 76.6%, 치과의생사에게 시술받았다는 대상자는 11.3%로 나타났다. 2. 치면열구전색사업에 대한 찬성 여부를 살펴본 결과 과반수인 61.9%는 찬성, 38.1%는 반대라고 응답했으며, 만족도 중 예방효과에 대한 만족도가 $3.92{\pm}.85$로 가장 높게, 비용 만족도는 $1.91{\pm}.86$으로 가장 낮게 나타났다. 3. 일반적 특성에 따른 만족도는 경기지역에 사는 학부모들이 서울에 사는 학부모들에 비해 비용적인 면에 만족도가 높은 것으로 나타났으며(p<0.05), 자녀수가 적을수록 비용에 대해서도 만족하는 것으로 나타났다(p<.001). 즉, 비용 만족도는 거주지와 자녀수에 따라, 예방효과 만족도는 나이에 따라 통계적으로 유의한 차이를 보였다. 4. 사후관리 기간에 따른 치면열구전색 찬성 여부 중 찬성과 반대 그룹에서 사후관리 약속이 없었다고 응답한 대상자는 각각 31.5%, 36.4%로 조사되었으며, 두 그룹 중 기간 제한 없이 사후관리를 해준다고 응답한 대상자는 찬성 8.4%, 반대 0%로 조사돼 통계적으로 유의한 차이를 보였다(p<0.05).

• 대한기관윤리심의기구협의회지
• /
• 제2권2호
• /
• pp.37-48
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess the operational status and level of understanding among IRB and HRPP staffs at a hospital or a research institute to the HRPP guideline set by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) and to provide recommendations. Methods: Online survey was distributed among members of Korean Association of IRB (KAIRB) through each IRB office. The result was separated according to topic and descriptive statistics was used for analysis. Result: Survey notification was sent out to 176 institutions and 65 (37.1%) institutions answered the survey by online. Of 65 institutions that answered the survey; 83.1% was hospital, 12.3% was university, 3.1% was medical college, 1.5% was research institution. 23 institutions (25.4%) established independent HRPP offices and 39 institutions (60.0%) did not. 12 institutions (18.5%) had separate IRB and HRPP heads, 21 (32.3%) institutions separated business reporting procedure and person in charge, 12 institutions separated the responsibility of IRB and HRPP among staff, and 45 institutions (69.2%) had audit & non-compliance managers. When asked about the most important basic task for HRPP, 23% answered self-audit. And according to 43.52%, self-audit was also the most by both institutions that operated HRPP and institutions that did not. When basic task performance status was analyzed, on average, the institutions that operated HRPP was 14% higher than institutions that only operated IRB. 9 (13.8%) institutions were evaluated and obtained HRPP accreditation from MFDS and the most common reason for obtaining the accreditation was to be selected as Institution for the education of persons conducting clinical trial (6 institutions). The most common reason for not obtaining HRPP accreditation was because of insufficient staff and limited capacity of the institution (28%). Institutions with and without a plan to be HRPP accredited by MFDS were 20 (37.7%) each. 34 institutions (52.3%) answered HRPP evaluation method and accreditation by MFDS was appropriate while 31 institutions (47.7%) answered otherwise. 36 institutions answered that HRPP evaluation and accreditation by MFDS was credible while 29 institutions (44.5%) answered that HRPP evaluation method and accreditation by MFDS was not credible. Conclusion: 1. MFDS's HRPP accreditation program can facilitate the main objective of HRPP and MFDS's HRPP accreditation program should be encouraged to non-tertiary hospitals by taking small staff size into consideration and issuing accreditation by segregating accreditation. 2. While issuing Institution for the education of persons conducting clinical trial status as a benefit of MFDS's HRPP accreditation program, it can also hinder access to MFDS's HRPP accreditation program. It should also be considered that the non-contact culture during COVID-19 pandemic eliminated time and space limitation for education. 3. For clinical research conducted internally by an institution, internal audit is the most effective and sole method of protecting safety and right of the test subjects and integrity for research in Korea. For this reason, regardless of the size of the institution, an internal audit should be enforced. 4. It is necessary for KAIRB and MFDSto improve HRPP awareness by advocating and educating the concept and necessity of HRPP in clinical research. 5. A new HRPP accreditation system should be setup for all clinical research with human subjects, including Investigational New Drug (IND) application in near future.