20 resultados para EMERGENCY PLANS
em University of Queensland eSpace - Australia
Resumo:
Objective To determine the costs and benefits of interventions for maternal and newborn health to assess the appropriateness of current strategies and guide future plans to attain the millennium development goals. Design Cost effectiveness analysis. Setting Two regions classified by the World Health Organization according to their epidemiological grouping: Afr-E, those countries in sub-Saharan Africa with very high adult and high child mortality, and Sear-D, comprising countries in South East Asia with high adult and high child mortality. Data sources Effectiveness data from several sources, including trials, observational studies, and expert opinion. For resource inputs, quantifies came from WHO guidelines, literature, and expert opinion, and prices from the WHO choosing interventions that are cost effective database. Main outcome measures Cost per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted in year 2000 international dollars. Results The most cost effective mix of interventions was similar in Afr-E and Sear-D. These were the community based newborn care package, followed by antenatal care (tetanus toxoid, screening for pre-eclampsia, screening and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria and syphilis); skilled attendance at birth, offering first level maternal and neonatal care around childbirth; and emergency obstetric and neonatal care around and after birth. Screening and treatment of maternal syphilis, community based management of neonatal pneumonia, and steroids given during the antenatal period were relatively less cost effective in Sear-D. Scaling up all of the included interventions to 95% coverage would halve neonatal and maternal deaths. Conclusion Preventive interventions at the community level for newborn babies and at the primary care level for mothers and newborn babies are extremely cost effective, but the millennium development goals for maternal and child health will not be achieved without universal access to clinical services as well.
Resumo:
A pilot survey was undertaken of injury presentations to a public hospital emergency department to determine patterns of alcohol use in this population. Of the 402 injury presentations in the study period, a total of 236 injury cases were interviewed, of whom 45% (n=107) and 29% (n=69) had consumed alcohol 24 and 6 hours prior to injury. Mean age for all injury presentations was 35.1 years, and 32.6 years for alcohol injury cases. For both injury groups, males were significantly younger than females. Recent alcohol ingestion was three times more common among male than female injury presentations, but with females drinking at significantly lower levels. Of males who had consumed alcohol 6 hours prior to injury, nearly 70% were drinking at NHMRC harmful levels and 61% had drunk more than eight standard drinks. Overall, alcohol-involved injury cases commonly occurred among low-income, single males around 30 years of age who were regular heavy drinkers who were drinking heavily in licensed premises prior to their injury, and who sustained injury through intentional harm. In addition, one in five of the alcohol-involved injury cases were aged 15-18 years, i.e. below the legal age of purchase. The high proportion of hazardous and harmful drinkers among those who had consumed alcohol within the last 6 hours, and the injury sample overall, highlights the need for further research to explore the relationship between the occurrence of injury and the drinking patterns and environments associated with injury. Further research is also required to assess the efficacy of early and brief interventions for alcohol and drug use within the emergency ward setting. This information would enable appropriate public health interventions to be initiated.
Resumo:
Objective: To describe and analyse the study design and manuscript deficiencies in original research articles submitted to Emergency Medicine. Methods: This was a retrospective, analytical study. Articles were enrolled if the reports of the Section Editor and two reviewers were available. Data were extracted from these reports only. Outcome measures were the mean number and nature of the deficiencies and the mean reviewers’ assessment score. Results: Fifty-seven articles were evaluated (28 accepted for publication, 19 rejected, 10 pending revision). The mean (± SD) number of deficiencies was 18.1 ± 6.9, 16.4 ± 6.5 and 18.4 ± 6.7 for all articles, articles accepted for publication and articles rejected, respectively (P = 0.31 between accepted and rejected articles). The mean assessment scores (0–10) were 5.5 ± 1.5, 5.9 ± 1.5 and 4.7 ± 1.4 for all articles, articles accepted for publication and articles rejected, respectively. Accepted articles had a significantly higher assessment score than rejected articles (P = 0.006). For each group, there was a negative correlation between the number of deficiencies and the mean assessment score (P > 0.05). Significantly more rejected articles ‘… did not further our knowledge’ (P = 0.0014) and ‘… did not describe background information adequately’ (P = 0.049). Many rejected articles had ‘… findings that were not clinically or socially significant’ (P = 0.07). Common deficiencies among all articles included ambiguity of the methods (77%) and results (68%), conclusions not warranted by the data (72%), poor referencing (56%), inadequate study design description (51%), unclear tables (49%), an overly long discussion (49%), limitations of the study not described (51%), inadequate definition of terms (49%) and subject selection bias (40%). Conclusions: Researchers should undertake studies that are likely to further our knowledge and be clinically or socially significant. Deficiencies in manuscript preparation are more frequent than mistakes in study design and execution. Specific training or assistance in manuscript preparation is indicated.