Background. A dentist’s professional activity requires a high level of personality traits that are usually regarded as a combination of both female and male traits. Androgynous gender identity ...corresponds to dentists’ professional requirements and allows the dentists to retain mental stability and psychological well-being. Objective. The goal of this study is to determine the specificity of the androgynous identity in dentists in the context of gender differences as indicators of mental health and subjective well-being. Design. The first stage of the research covered 129 dentists of both sexes to reveal their androgynous gender type using the Bem Sex Role Inventory. During the second stage, 117 androgynous dentists were studied using the SCL-90-R and Brief Subjective Well-being Questionnaire in an effort to reveal the specificity of the dentists’ mental health and self-esteem. Results. According to the results, individuals with an androgynous type of gender identity constitute the largest part of dentists (90.70 %), regardless of their biological sex. The expression of masculinity does not statistically differ from the expression of femininity within the androgynous sample. Regardless of their sex, these dentists are characterized by a higher level of mental health. No significant differences were revealed between androgynous men and androgynous women in their subjective well-being indicators - self-estimation of health, satisfaction with material status and success motivation. Conclusion. We concluded that androgyny is the most common type of gender identity in the men and women engaged in dentistry. The basic gender characteristic in the structure of androgynous identity in dentists is masculinity, which is closely interrelated with mental health and subjective well-being regardless of biological sex.
Assess whether staff training in advanced rapport skills and self-hypnotic relaxation techniques reduces noncompletion rates during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
All staff of a free-standing MRI ...facility was invited to 3 hours of preparatory communication lectures. Half of the practice was then engaged in intensive training. Clerical personnel and nonlicensed health care professionals received training in advanced rapport skills only (8 hours); licensed health care professionals were trained in advanced rapport skills plus rapid hypnotic techniques (17 hours). Content was adapted so that no interruptions of workflow would become necessary. The format included lectures, large group discussions, small group practice, and a microteaching exercise.
During the quarter of operation before the training 1.2% (80 of 6,654) of patients could not complete their studies. After training, 0.74% (52 of 7,008) patients did not complete their scans (P < .01). Noncompletion rates of scans on the open magnet, on which the most anxious patients were scheduled, decreased from 3.43% (37 of 1,078 patients per quarter) to 1.45% (19 of 1,098). After staff was informed that the MRI partnership would be dissolved and personnel might be transferred or laid off, the noncompletion rate increased again, although not to the original levels; then, after partial dismantling of the facility, leveled off to 0.92% overall and 1.84% on the open magnet. Success was maintained at 1-year follow-up.
Team training in advanced rapport skills and self-hypnotic relaxation techniques significantly reduces MRI noncompletion rates. Personnel distress can adversely affect the patient experience.
The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing a joint methodology for estimating the national and global work-related burden of disease and injury ...(WHO/ILO joint methodology), with contributions from a large network of experts. In this paper, we present the protocol for two systematic reviews of parameters for estimating the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years from cardiovascular disease attributable to exposure to occupational noise, to inform the development of the WHO/ILO joint methodology.
We aim to systematically review studies on exposure to occupational noise (Systematic Review 1) and systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the effect of occupational noise on cardiovascular diseases (Systematic Review 2), applying the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology as an organizing framework, conducting both systematic reviews in tandem and in a harmonized way.
Separately for Systematic Reviews 1 and 2, we will search electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and CISDOC. We will also search electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand search reference list of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consult additional experts.
We will include working-age (≥15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State, but exclude children (<15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. The eligible risk factor will be occupational noise. Eligible outcomes will be hypertensive heart disease, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, cardiomyopathy, myocarditis, endocarditis and other circulatory diseases. For Systematic Review 1, we will include quantitative prevalence studies of exposure to occupational noise (i.e., low: <85 dB(A) and high: ≥85 dB(A)) stratified by country, sex, age and industrial sector or occupation. For Systematic Review 2, we will include randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and other non-randomized intervention studies with an estimate of the relative effect of high exposure to occupational noise on the prevalence of, incidence of or mortality due to cardiovascular disease, compared with the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (i.e., low exposure).
At least two review authors will independently screen titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. At least two review authors will assess risk of bias and the quality of evidence, using the most suited tools currently available. For Systematic Review 2, if feasible, we will combine relative risks using meta-analysis. We will report results using the guidelines for accurate and transparent health estimates reporting (GATHER) for Systematic Review 1 and the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines (PRISMA) for Systematic Review 2.
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018092272.
•WHO and ILO are developing a joint methodology for estimating the national and global work-related burden of disease and injury.•A large network of experts is contributing to this WHO/ILO joint methodology with two systematic reviews described in this protocol.•Prevalence studies on exposure to occupational noise will be systematically reviewed.•Studies on effects of occupational noise exposure on cardiovascular disease will be systematically reviewed and meta-analysed.
PDF
