SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Clinical Rehabilitation
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hanley, J.
Right arrow Articles by Prescott, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Hanley, J.
Right arrow Articles by Prescott, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Clinical trial of incontinence garments: recognition of the possible influence of the Hawthorne effect

Janet Hanley

Nursing and Mobility Equipment Resource Centre, Astley Ainslie Hospital, Edinburgh

Mairi Beveridge

Nursing and Mobility Equipment Resource Centre, Astley Ainslie Hospital, Edinburgh

Cairns Aitken

Rehabilitation Studies Unit, Princess Margaret Rose Hospital, Edinburgh

John Hunter

Rehabilitation Studies Unit, Princess Margaret Rose Hospital, Edinburgh

Tom Dick

Bioengineering Unit, Princess Margaret Rose Hospital, Edinburgh

Robin Prescott

Medical Statistics Unit, University of Edinburgh

The results of clinical trials must be interpreted with care, recognizing that they may be affected by factors other than the items being tested. Different garments were routinely supplied from two distribution centres in Edinburgh, Urocare to the majority of patients in North Lothian and Hygi to those in South Lothian. One hundred patients were recruited and a crossover comparative trial carried out. The response in the two areas was different. Whereas patients in South Lothian found no significant difference between the two garments, those in North Lothian rated the Hygi garment better in terms of comfort (p=0.01), leakage (p<0.001), odour (p=0.01) and avoidance of skin problems (p=0.01). It is suggested that the difference in response may be explained by the Hawthorne effect and this should be taken into account when planning future equipment trials.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 2, No. 4, 285-290 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/026921558800200403
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement