Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27276015›Full record

ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2016

Educational intervention for collecting sputum for tuberculosis: a quasi-experimental study.

Amélia Nunes Sicsú, Julia Ignez Salem, Luciana Botinelly Mendonça Fujimoto, Roxana Isabel Cardozo Gonzales, Maria do Socorro de Lucena Cardoso, Pedro Fredemir Palha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Standardized sputum collection increases sputum sample collection rate for novel coronavirus nucleic acid detection].Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Amélia Nunes SicsúDoctoral student, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil. Assistant Professor, Escola Superior de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade do Estado do Amazonas, Manaus, AM, Brasil. Scholarship holder from Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Amazonas (FAPEAM), Brazil. , Universidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto SP , Brazil.
Julia Ignez SalemResearcher, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisa da Amazônia, Manaus, AM, Brazil., Instituto Nacional de Pesquisa da Amazônia, Manaus AM , Brazil.
Luciana Botinelly Mendonça FujimotoAdjuntct Professor, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Manaus, AM, Brazil., Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Manaus AM , Brazil.
Roxana Isabel Cardozo GonzalesAdjunct Professor, Faculdade de Enfermagem e Obstetrícia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, RS, Brazil., Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Faculdade de Enfermagem e Obstetrícia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas RS , Brazil.
Maria do Socorro de Lucena CardosoAdjuntct Professor, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Manaus, AM, Brazil., Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Amazonas, Manaus AM , Brazil.
Pedro Fredemir PalhaAssociate Professor, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, , Universidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveto evaluate the quality of the sputum sample before and after the Nursing guidance to patients.

methodsthis is a quasi-experimental research design, single group type, before and after, non-randomized study. The study enrolled patients with suspected pulmonary tuberculosis, respiratory symptomatic patients for over three weeks, aged over 18 years, of both genders and without tuberculosis history in the last two years. The educational intervention consisted of individualized guidance on the collection of sputum sample, which was based on the guidelines of the Ministry of Health of Brazil and on the explanatory folder delivery.

resultsin this study participated 138 patients with suspected pulmonary tuberculosis. The results showed significant increase of the samples with purulent particles, volume greater than 5 mL and increased rate of patients diagnosed with tuberculosis, after the educational intervention.

conclusionit was shown that after the educational intervention, it was observed sputum samples with better quality, with satisfactory aspect and volume for the effectiveness of the bacilloscopic examination.

Indexed as

Specimen HandlingSputumEducation, NursingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNon-Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicPractice Guidelines as TopicTuberculosis, Pulmonary

Identifiers

PMID27276015
PMCPMC4915801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.