Background:Heart failure is one of the most important and prevalent diseases that may have negative effects on the quality of life (QOL). Today, the promotion of QOL in patients with heart failure is important in nursing care programs. This research aimed to determine the efficacy of hope-promoting interventions based on religious beliefs on the QOL of patients with congestive heart failure (CHF).Materials and Methods:In this randomized clinical trial (IRCT2014100619413N1) conducted in Isfahan, Iran, 46 adult patients with CHF were selected and randomly assigned to study and control groups. Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index (QLI) was completed by both groups before, immediately after, and 1 month after the intervention. For the study group participants and their families, 60-min sessions of hope-promoting interventions based on religious beliefs were held twice a week for 3 weeks. Independent t, repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), Chi-square, Mann–Whitney, and Fisher's exact tests were adopted for data analysis.Results:The mean (standard deviation) overall QOL score in the area of satisfaction significantly increased in the study group, compared to the controls, immediately [70.7 (8.5) vs. 59.2 (12.5)] and 1 month after the intervention [75.2 (7.4) vs. 59.4 (12.9)] (P < 0.05). There was also a similar difference between the two groups in the area of importance immediately [73.6 (5.8) vs. 65.7 (7.5)] and 1 month after the intervention [76.3 (8.1) vs. 66.8 (8.5)] (P < 0.05).Conclusions:Hope-promoting intervention based on religious beliefs is a useful method for improving QOL in patients with CHF.

Background: Blinding is one of the critical criteria of clinical trials that prevents probable bias. Judgment regarding results of an intervention significantly depends on the quality of such studies, one of which is blinding. This study aimed to investigate blinding and its quality in clinical trials in patients with breast cancer. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was conducted on the online databases of PubMed, ScienceDirect and ProQuest using keywords, MeSH terms and grey literature. Articles were screened by predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. They were evaluated based on the checklists introduced by Cochrane database. Results: From 22519 articles obtained at the initial stage, 20 articles remained after screening for the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Fifteen articles had used single, five: double and none had used triple or quadruple blinding. Seventeen studies had described the details of blinding. Of the 15 single blind articles, the blinded subjects were patients in five, patients and research assistants in three, research assistants in five studies, and two had not given any details. Conclusions: The majority of researchers had used the single blind method, though using double, triple or quadruple blinding increases the trustworthiness of results and increases the quality of clinical trials. The details of blinding should be explained to other researchers and for a better understanding of the method if it is to be repeated. Thereafter, nurses can apply new interventions and earn their patients' trust and help those with breast cancer by relieving them of their disease symptoms and its treatment complications.