BackgroundCollege students are prone to stress due to the transitional nature of college life. High levels of stress are believed to affect students' health and academic functions. If the stress is not dealt with effectively, feelings of loneliness, nervousness, sleeplessness and worrying may result. Effective coping strategies facilitate the return to a balanced state, reducing the negative effects of stress.MethodsThis descriptive cross-sectional study was performed to determine sources of stress and coping strategies in nursing students studying at the Iran Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery. All undergraduate nursing students enrolled in years 1-4 during academic year 2004-2005 were included in this study, with a total of 366 questionnaires fully completed by the students. The Student Stress Survey and the Adolescent Coping Orientation for Problem Experiences Inventory (ACOPE) were used for data collection.ResultsMost students reported "finding new friends" (76.2%), "working with people they did not know" (63.4%) as interpersonal sources of stress, "new responsibilities" (72.1%), "started college" (65.8%) as intrapersonal sources of stress more than others. The most frequent academic source of stress was "increased class workload" (66.9%) and the most frequent environmental sources of stress were being "placed in unfamiliar situations" (64.2%) and "waiting in long lines" (60.4%). Interpersonal and environmental sources of stress were reported more frequently than intrapersonal and academic sources. Mean interpersonal (P=0.04) and environmental (P=0.04) sources of stress were significantly greater in first year than in fourth year students. Among coping strategies in 12 areas, the family problem solving strategies, "trying to reason with parents and compromise" (73%) and "going along with family rules" (68%) were used "often or always" by most students. To cope with engaging in demanding activity, students often or always used "trying to figure out how to deal with problems" (66.4%) and "trying to improve themselves" (64.5%). The self-reliance strategy, "trying to make their own decisions" (62%); the social support strategies, "apologizing to people" (59.6%), "trying to help other people solve their problems" (56.3%), and "trying to keep up friendships or make new friends" (54.4%); the spiritual strategy, "praying" (65.8%); the seeking diversions strategy, "listening to music" (57.7%), the relaxing strategy "day dreaming" (52.5%), and the effort to "be close with someone cares about you" (50.5%) were each used "often or always" by a majority of students. Most students reported that the avoiding strategies "smoking" (93.7%) and "drinking beer or wine" (92.9%), the ventilating strategies "saying mean things to people" and "swearing" (85.8%), the professional support strategies "getting professional counseling" (74.6%) and "talking to a teacher or counselor" (67.2%) and the humorous strategy "joking and keeping a sense of humor" (51.9%) were used "seldom or never".ConclusionFirst year nursing students are expose...

AimsNasal glucagon (NG) is a nasally‐administered glucagon powder, absorbed through the nasal mucosa, designed for treatment of severe hypoglycaemia. This study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of NG in otherwise healthy participants with common colds and after recovery from cold symptoms, with and without concomitant nasal decongestant.Materials and MethodsThis was a single‐centre, open‐label study. Cohort 1 participants (N = 18) received 2 doses of NG: one while experiencing nasal congestion and another after recovery from cold symptoms. Cohort 2 participants (N = 18), who also had colds with nasal congestion, received a single dose of NG 2 hours after treatment with the decongestant oxymetazoline. Total symptoms score and other safety measures were assessed before and after NG administration.ResultsNG was well tolerated, without serious adverse events. Common adverse events (transient lacrimation, nasal discomfort, rhinorrhea and nausea) were more frequent in both Cohorts 1 and 2 during nasal congestion. Glucagon levels peaked 18 minutes post‐dose and glucose levels peaked 30 to 42 minutes post‐dose in all groups. Nasal congestion, with or without concomitant nasal decongestant, did not significantly affect PK of NG. Although glucose AUECs0‐t was different between Cohort 1 with nasal congestion and Cohort 2, glucose concentrations at 30 minutes appeared similar in all groups.ConclusionsThere were no clinically relevant differences in safety or PK/PD of NG associated with nasal congestion or concomitant administration of nasal decongestant, suggesting that NG can be used to treat severe hypoglycaemia in individuals experiencing nasal congestion.