6 research outputs found
A mixed methods study exploring the barriers and facilitators of screening for autism spectrum disorder in Oman
No full textBackground:
Within the routine practice, specific screening for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has been recommended, in order to facilitate early intervention and improve outcomes. Despite the substantial advantages of this process, it has also presented a variety of challenges, across clinical settings, which have not yet been explored sufficiently. There is little information available to support the introduction of ASD screening in Oman. Research is required to identify the potential facilitators of and barriers to ASD screening in Oman, prior to the implementation of a screening programme, to ensure its successful introduction.
Method:
An exploratory mixed-methods design was adopted, in two sequential phases. Phase 1 involved two focus group discussions, with seven nurses and six GPs, from primary health care (PHC) settings in Oman. The participants were recruited using a purposive and snowballing technique. The discussions were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. Framework Analysis was used to identify recurrent themes within and across groups. Data from the focus groups was then used to inform the development of a questionnaire, which was piloted on a sub-sample of volunteers from both groups. Phase two (quantitative phase) comprised of sending the final draft of the questionnaire to a random sample of primary health care providers (PHPs) (n=571) across Oman. The returned data was analysed statistically with the software program SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 22.0). The Social Ecological Model (SEM) was then applied to interpret the final data from both phases and to draw conclusions.
Results:
Qualitative data analysis revealed five themes, which voiced the major challenges facing ASD screening in Oman, as well as highlighting a few facilitators. The findings revealed that both nurses and GPs believed that introducing screening for ASD would be a positive step. However, they felt overwhelmed by their responsibilities and believed that their workplaces lacked the necessary infrastructure. Practitioners’ awareness of ASD services was identified as poor, as were the essential skills required for undertaking screening. Additionally, limited public awareness of ASD and a strong interest in traditional medicine, as well as the social stigma attributed to ASD, were thought to create barriers to screening. The groups also discussed their preference for a clear, simple, paper-based questionnaire, supported with guidance and researcher availability to reward their willingness to participate.
The findings from the focus group informed the development of a 38-item questionnaire to explore the potential barriers to and facilitators of the introduction of ASD screening in Oman. The questionnaire was short so that it could be completed within 15 minutes.
Five hundred and seventy-one questionnaires were sent to a random sample of PHP providers across Oman. Of those, five hundred and sixteen questionnaires were returned, in phase 2 (response rate 90.37%). The quantitative results of this phase were congruent with the qualitative findings, in that they suggested a deficit in the knowledge of professionals, among both older respondents and nurse respondents. In addition, a lack of resources, time constraints, workload issues and staff shortages were highlighted. The respondents also emphasised the ambiguity surrounding their role and the lack of guidance on protocols to identify or refer suspected cases. This was compounded by a lack of public awareness and knowledge of ASD identification and its potential causes, as well as the attributed social stigma.
Conclusions:
The root challenges and potential facilitators for screening for ASD were examined, through the SEM. Challenges were addressed and resolved across three levels (intrapersonal, organisational, and community). At the intrapersonal level, more training and knowledge regarding ASD is required. Organisations need to implement a clear protocol, to guide the process, with greater coordination and collaboration among services. A country-wide awareness campaign, targeting social issues, may reduce the stigma and improve the uptake of screening
Qualitative exploration of the barriers to, and facilitators of, screening children for autism spectrum disorder in Oman
No full textFew studies explored the challenges associated with screening of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in Arab and Middle Eastern countries. This study aims to explore the facilitators of and barriers to screening for ASD in Oman. The study reported the initial qualitative phase of a mixed-method design that conducted two focus group discussions, involving 13 nurses and general practitioners (GPs) from primary healthcare settings. Participants were recruited using a purposive and snowballing technique. Discussions were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. The Framework Analysis was used to identify recurrent themes within and across groups. Both groups were positive about introducing screening for ASD. However, they felt burdened with responsibilities and lacked the infrastructure and an awareness of ASD services in Oman, as well as the essential skills to undertake screening. Additionally, limited public awareness of ASD and an interest in traditional medicine, as well as social stigma were considered barriers to screening
Systematic review: cultural adaptation and feasibility of screening for autism in non-English speaking countries
No full textBackground: Screening children for autism has gained wider acceptance within clinical practice, and early intervention
has improved outcomes. Increasingly, adapting an existing screening instrument is a common, fast method to
create a usable screening tool, especially for countries with limited resources and/or expertise. However, concerns
have been raised regarding adaptation adequacy and the feasibility of screening across cultural groups. This study systematically
examined the levels of cultural adaptation and feasibility aspects considered when screening for autism in
non-English speaking countries to build upon the sparse knowledge that exists on this topic in the literature.
Methods: Nineteen studies, obtained from fve electronic databases, were examined. PRISMA guidance was used for
this review. The Ecological Validity Framework model, and Bowen Recommendations for Feasibility were adopted to
extract relevant data, which was synthesised narratively.
Results: Cultural adaptation within the included studies mostly involved language translation with little information
ofered to enable conclusions on how the processes were guided and maintained. Few cultural adjustments involved
modifying screening methods; clarifying difcult concepts and changing instrument content were employed to
address the core values, competence, beliefs, and norms of the adapted culture. However, less attention was given
to adapt the screening goals within the context of cultural values, and customs or to consider interactional match
between the clients and assessors. The review also highlighted an acceptable level of practicality to screen for autism
but did not encourage integrating autism screening within routine practice or beyond the study context for diferent
cultures.
Conclusion: Concurring with previous literature, we agree that knowledge on cultural adaptation for autism screening
instruments is limited and not sufciently documented to establish adaptation levels (process and/or contents),
and prove adequacy. However, this review provides an infrastructure to improve future adaptation processes. Integrating
autism screening as routine medical practice is not encouraged and warrants further feasibility studies to minimize
wasted resources and improve screening efectiveness in various health care systems
Health and wellbeing of staff working at higher education institutions globally during the post-COVID-19 pandemic period : evidence from a cross-sectional study
No full textBackground: The ongoing global crisis of Higher Education (HE) institutions during the post-COVID-19 pandemic period has increased the likelihood of enduring psychological stressors for staff. This study aimed to identify factors associated with job insecurity, burnout, psychological distress and coping amongst staff working at HE institutions globally. Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional study was conducted in 2023 with staff at HE institutions across 16 countries. Job insecurity was measured using the Job Insecurity Scale (JIS), burnout using the Perceived Burnout measure question, psychological distress using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), and coping using the Brief Resilient Coping Scale. Multivariable logistic regression with a stepwise variable selection method was used to identify associations. Results: A total of 2,353 staff participated; the mean age (± SD) was 43(± 10) years and 61% were females. Most staff (85%) did not feel job insecurity, one-third (29%) perceived burnout in their jobs, more than two-thirds (73%) experienced moderate to very high levels of psychological distress, and more than half (58%) exhibited medium to high resilient coping. Perceived job insecurity was associated with staff working part-time [Adjusted Odds Ratio 1.53 (95% Confidence Intervals 1.15–2.02)], having an academic appointment [2.45 (1.78–3.27)], having multiple co-morbidities [1.86 (1.41–2.48)], perceived burnout [1.99 (1.54–2.56)] and moderate to very high level of psychological distress [1.68 (1.18–2.39)]. Perceived burnout was associated with being female [1.35 (1.12–1.63)], having multiple co-morbidities [1.53 (1.20–1.97)], perceived job insecurity [1.99 (1.55–2.57)], and moderate to very high levels of psychological distress [3.23 (2.42–4.30)]. Staff with multiple co-morbidities [1.46 (1.11–1.92)], mental health issues [2.73 (1.79–4.15)], perceived job insecurity [1.61 (1.13–2.30)], and perceived burnout [3.22 (2.41–4.31)] were associated with moderate to very high levels of psychological distress. Staff who perceived their mental health as good to excellent [3.36 (2.69–4.19)] were more likely to have medium to high resilient coping. Conclusions: Factors identified in this study should be considered in reviewing and updating current support strategies for staff at HE institutions across all countries to reduce stress and burnout and improve wellbeing. © The Author(s) 2024. **Please note that there are multiple authors for this article therefore only the name of the first 30 including Federation University Australia affiliate “Muhammad Aziz Rahman, Pritmoy Das, Sheikh Alif, Masudus Salehin, Biswajit Banik, Bindu Joseph, Parul Parul, Andrew Lewis, Dixie Statham, Joanne Porter, Wendy Cross, Remco Polman” is provided in this record*
COVID-19: Factors associated with psychological distress, fear, and coping strategies among community members across 17 countries
No full textAbstract Background The current pandemic of COVID-19 impacted the psychological wellbeing of populations globally. Objectives We aimed to examine the extent and identify factors associated with psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study across 17 countries during Jun-2020 to Jan-2021. Levels of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale), fear of COVID-19 (Fear of COVID-19 Scale), and coping (Brief Resilient Coping Scale) were assessed. Results A total of 8,559 people participated; mean age (±SD) was 33(±13) years, 64% were females and 40% self-identified as frontline workers. More than two-thirds (69%) experienced moderate-to-very high levels of psychological distress, which was 46% in Thailand and 91% in Egypt. A quarter (24%) had high levels of fear of COVID-19, which was as low as 9% in Libya and as high as 38% in Bangladesh. More than half (57%) exhibited medium to high resilient coping; the lowest prevalence (3%) was reported in Australia and the highest (72%) in Syria. Being female (AOR 1.31 [95% CIs 1.09-1.57]), perceived distress due to change of employment status (1.56 [1.29-1.90]), comorbidity with mental health conditions (3.02 [1.20-7.60]) were associated with higher levels of psychological distress and fear. Doctors had higher psychological distress (1.43 [1.04-1.97]), but low levels of fear of COVID-19 (0.55 [0.41-0.76]); nurses had medium to high resilient coping (1.30 [1.03-1.65]). Conclusions The extent of psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping varied by country; however, we identified few higher risk groups who were more vulnerable than others. There is an urgent need to prioritise health and well-being of those people through well-designed intervention that may need to be tailored to meet country specific requirements
Additional file 1 of COVID-19: Factors associated with psychological distress, fear, and coping strategies among community members across 17 countries
No full textAdditional file 1: Table S1. Levels of psychological distress among the study participants (based on K-10 scoring). Table S2. Levels of fear of COVID-19 among the study participants (based on the FCV-19S scoring). Table S3. Coping during COVID-19 pandemic among the study participants
