Building family/general practice research capacity

To promote the range of interventions for building family/general practice (family medicine) research capacity, we describe successful international examples. Such examples of interventions that build research capacity focus on diseases and illness research, as well as process research; monitor the output of research in family/general practice (family medicine); increase the number of family medicine research journals; encourage and enable research skills acquisition (including making it part of professional training); strengthen the academic base; and promote research networks and collaborations. The responsibility for these interventions lies with the government, colleges and academies, and universities. There are exciting and varied methods of building research capacity in family medicine.

Exercise training for patients with heart failure: A systematic review of factors that improve mortality and morbidity

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of exercise training and its effects on outcomes in patients with heart failure. METHODS: MEDLINE, Medscape, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry were searched for trials of exercise training in heart failure patients. Data relating to training protocol, exercise capacity, and outcome measures were extracted and reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 81 studies were identified: 30 randomized controlled trials, five nonrandomized controlled trials, nine randomized crossover trials, and 37 longitudinal cohort studies. Exercise training was performed in 2387 patients. The average increment in peak oxygen consumption was 17% in 57 studies that measured oxygen consumption directly, 17% in 40 studies of aerobic training, 9% in three studies that only used strength training, 15% in 13 studies of combined aerobic and strength training, and 16% in the one study on inspiratory training. There were no reports of deaths that were directly related to exercise during more than 60,000 patient-hours of exercise training. During the training and follow-up periods of the randomized controlled trials, there were 56 combined (deaths or adverse events) events in the exercise groups and 75 combined events in the control groups (odds ratio [OR] = 0.98; 95% confidence interval [Cl]: 0.61 to 1.32; P = 0.60). During this same period, 26 exercising and 41 nonexercising subjects died (OR = 0.71; 95% CT: 0.37 to 1.02; P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Exercise training is safe and effective in patients with heart failure. The risk of adverse events may be reduced, but further studies are required to determine whether there is any mortality benefit. (C) 2004 by Excerpta Medica Inc.