Molecular epidemiology: A multidisciplinary approach to understanding parasitic zoonoses

Sound application of molecular epidemiological principles requires working knowledge of both molecular biological and epidemiological methods. Molecular tools have become an increasingly important part of studying the epidemiology of infectious agents. Molecular tools have allowed the aetiological agent within a population to be diagnosed with a greater degree of efficiency and accuracy than conventional diagnostic tools. They have increased the understanding of the pathogenicity, virulence, and host-parasite relationships of the aetiological agent, provided information on the genetic structure and taxonomy of the parasite and allowed the zoonotic potential of previously unidentified agents to be determined. This review describes the concept of epidemiology and proper study design, describes the array of currently available molecular biological tools and provides examples of studies that have integrated both disciplines to successfully unravel zoonotic relationships that would otherwise be impossible utilising conventional diagnostic tools. The current limitations of applying these tools, including cautions that need to be addressed during their application are also discussed.(c) 2005 Australian Society for Parasitology Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Multidisciplinary case conference reviews: Improving outcomes for nursing home residents, carers and health professionals

Aim of study: This study sought to determine whether multidisciplinary case conference reviews improved outcomes for nursing home residents, and the effects of this team approach to resident care on carers, including the hands-on carers employed by the nursing home, and health professionals. Method: 245 residents of three Canberra nursing homes were enrolled in this non-randomised controlled trial. The intervention consisted of sessions of three case conference reviews held between 10/4/96 and 4/12/96. These sessions were attended by the General Practitioners (GPs) of the residents discussed, the GP project officer from the ACT Division of General Practice, a clinical pharmacist, senior nursing staff, other health professionals eg physiotherapist, and occasionally the resident concerned or their representative. At each review, a case presentation by the resident's GP was followed by a multidisciplinary discussion of all aspects, medical and non-medical, of the resident's care. The review concluded with a management plan for the resident. In total 75 residents were reviewed. Main outcome measures: Medication use and cost, and mortality. Results: One month after the reviews were completed comparisons between those who were reviewed and those who were not showed non-significant reductions in medication orders, medication cost, and mortality in the reviewed group. Many of the 92 recommendations in the management plans that were carried out benefited the residents (n=37) and/or carers (n=24). The responses of the GPs and the Directors of Nursing to the reviews were overwhelmingly positive. Conclusion: Recommendations arising from multidisciplinary case conferences were carried out to the benefit of patients and carers. Given the support shown by key stakeholders, multidisciplinary conferences should be used more.

Multidisciplinary strategies for the management of heart failure patients at high risk for admission - A systematic review of randomized trials

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine whether multidisciplinary strategies improve outcomes for heart failure (HF) patients. BACKGROUND Because the prognosis of HF remains poor despite pharmacotherapy, there is increasing interest in alternative models of care delivery for these patients. METHODS Randomized trials of multidisciplinary management programs in HF were identified by searching electronic databases and bibliographies and via contact with experts. RESULTS Twenty-nine trials (5,039 patients) were identified but were not pooled, because of considerable heterogeneity. A priori, we divided the interventions into homogeneous groups that were suitable for pooling. Strategies that incorporated follow-up by a specialized multidisciplinary team (either in a clinic or a non-clinic setting) reduced mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59 to 0.96), HF hospitalizations (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.87), and all-cause hospitalizations (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.92). Programs that focused on enhancing patient self-care activities reduced HF hospitalizations (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.83) and all-cause hospitalizations (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.93) but had no effect on mortality (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.94). Strategies that employed telephone contact and advised patients to attend their primary care physician in the event of deterioration reduced HF hospitalizations (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.99) but not mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.29) or all-cause hospitalizations (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.20). In 15 of 18 trials that evaluated cost, multidisciplinary strategies were cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS Multidisciplinary strategies for the management of patients with HF reduce HF hospitalizations. Those programs that involve specialized follow-up by a multidisciplinary team also reduce mortality and all-cause hospitalizations. (C) 2004 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Controlled trial of multidisciplinary care teams for acutely ill medical inpatients: enhanced multidisciplinary care

Background: Acute hospital general medicine services care for ageing complex patients, using the skills of a range of health-care providers. Evidence suggests that comprehensive early assessment and discharge planning may improve efficiency and outcomes of care in older medical patients. Aim: To enhance assessment, communication, care and discharge planning by restructuring consistent, patient-centred multidisciplinary teams in a general medicine service. Methods: Prospective controlled trial enrolling 1538 consecutive medical inpatients. Intervention units with additional allied health staff formed consistent multidisciplinary teams aligned with inpatient admitting units rather than wards; implemented improved communication processes for early information collection and sharing between disciplines; and specified shared explicit discharge goals. Control units continued traditional, referral-based multidisciplinary models with existing staffing levels. Results: Access to allied health services was significantly enhanced. There was a trend to reduced index length of stay in the intervention units (7.3 days vs 7.8 days in control units, P = 0.18), with no change in 6-month readmissions. in-hospital mortality was reduced from 6.4 to 3.9% (P = 0.03); less patients experienced functional decline in hospital (P = 0.04) and patients' ratings of health status improved (P = 0.02). Additional staffing costs were balanced by potential bed-day savings. Conclusion: This model of enhanced multidisciplinary inpatient care has provided sustainable efficiency gains for the hospital and improved patient outcomes.