Displaying 1 - 4 of 4
BACKGROUND: Yoga is gaining momentum as a popular and evidence-based, integrative health care and self-care practice. The characteristics of yoga practitioners are not proportional to the demographics of the general population, especially with respect to gender and ethnicity. Several access barriers have been implicated (eg, time, cost, and access to teachers). No studies have explored the barriers to practice among health professions students. Their participation in yoga is deemed important because they are future health professionals who will make referrals to other services. Research has shown that providers who practice yoga refer more patients to yoga. OBJECTIVE: To increase yoga practice among health professions students, an understanding must be developed of factors that interfere with or facilitate a regular yoga practice. The current study intended to identify such barriers and motivators. DESIGN: This study was a small population survey. SETTING: The setting was a private university in the northwestern United States, including students in 3 of its colleges and 10 professional programs. PARTICIPANTS: All students (N = 1585) in the programs of the 10 health professions received e-mail requests for participation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The Acceptability of Yoga Survey was developed for purposes of a larger yoga perceptions study and implemented with health professions students. Participants were solicited via e-mail; the survey was administered online. The current study used data from that survey. RESULTS: Of the 498 usable, completed surveys (ie, a response rate of approximately 30%), 478 were relevant to the current study. The sample's demographics--78% women and 79% white--did not differ significantly from the population's demographics. The findings revealed the existence of common barriers that were related to (1) time; (2) cost; (3) lack of pragmatic information about access to yoga classes and teachers; and (4) stereotypes related to flexibility, athleticism, and typical yoga practitioners. Motivators included athleticism, health promotion, and emotional well-being as well as the seeking of pain relief and a sense of community. A referral by health care providers was the least-frequently cited motivator. CONCLUSIONS: The findings have implications for strategies that may help motivate health professionals toward a yoga practice, because having done yoga personally may be related to a willingness to perceive the benefits of and to refer patients to yoga as a viable integrative treatment for patients. Improved access can be developed in 3 ways: (1) integration of yoga research into health curricula to acquaint care providers with yoga's benefits to patients and care givers; (2) have yoga available as close to the workplace as possible to obviate some of the larger access barriers; and (3) societally, project yoga as a healing art and science, not simply as a weight loss strategy or athletic endeavor.
Sleep disorders and insomnia are more prevalent in patients with cancer than in the normal population. Sleep disorders consist of delayed sleep latency, waking episodes after sleep onset, unrefreshing sleep, reduced quality of sleep, and reduced sleep efficiency. Sleep disorders cluster with pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, and vasomotor symptoms, depending on stage of disease, treatment, and comorbidities. Premorbid sleep problems and shift work have been associated with a higher prevalence of cancer; in fact, shift work has been labeled a carcinogen. Treatment for insomnia includes cognitive behavioral therapy with sleep hygiene, bright-light therapy, exercise, yoga, melatonin, and hypnotic medications. Unfortunately, there are few randomized trials in cancer-related sleep disorders such that most recommendations particularly for hypnotics are based on treatment for primary insomnia. In this article, insomnia is reviewed as a predisposing factor to cancer, prior to and during treatment, in cancer survivorship and in advanced cancer. Recommendations for treatment are based on low-quality evidence but are also reviewed.
The development of a multidimensional individual difference measure of empathy is described. The final version of the instrument consists of four seven-item subscales, each of which taps a separate aspect of the global concept "empathy." One scale, the perspective-taking scale, contains items which assess spontaneous attempts to adopt the perspectives of other people and see things from their point of view. Items on the fantasy scale measure the tendency to identify with characters in movies, novels, plays and other fictional situations. The other two subscales explicitly tap respondents' chronic emotional reactions to the negative experiences of others. The empathic concern scale inquires about respondents' feelings of warmth, compassion, and concern for others, while the personal distress scale measures the personal feelings of anxiety and discomfort that result from observing another's negative experience. The factor structure underlying these scales is the same for both sexes, and emerged in two independent samples. Test-retest and internal reliabilities of all four scales were substantial. The pattern of sex differences and the intercorrelations of these four scales are discussed in terms of recent theoretical treatments of the development of empathy (Hoffman, 1976). It is concluded that the new measure has considerable potential for investigations of the multidimensional nature of empathy.
OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to assess whether an in-person mindfulness-based resilience training (MBRT) program or a smartphone-delivered resiliency-based intervention improved stress, well-being, and burnout in employees at a major tertiary health care institution.
METHODS:
Sixty participants were randomized to a 6-week MBRT, a resiliency-based smartphone intervention, or an active control group. Stress, well-being, and burnout were assessed at baseline, at program completion, and 3 months postintervention.
RESULTS:
Both the MBRT and the smartphone groups showed improvements in well-being, whereas only the MBRT group showed improvements in stress and emotional burnout over time. The control group did not demonstrate sustained improvement on any outcome.
CONCLUSION:
Findings suggest that brief, targeted interventions improve psychological outcomes and point to the need for larger scale studies comparing the individual and combined treatments that can inform development of tailored, effective, and low-cost programs for health care workers.