141 resultados para Forage grass quality
Resumo:
The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare organ doses delivered to patients in wrist and petrous bone examinations using a multislice spiral computed tomography (CT) and a C-arm cone-beam CT equipped with a flat-panel detector (XperCT). For this purpose, doses to the target organ, i.e. wrist or petrous bone, together with those to the most radiosensitive nearby organs, i.e. thyroid and eye lens, were measured and compared. Furthermore, image quality was compared for both imaging systems and different acquisition modes using a Catphan phantom. Results show that both systems guarantee adequate accuracy for diagnostic purposes for wrist and petrous bone examinations. Compared with the CT scanner, the XperCT system slightly reduces the dose to target organs and shortens the overall duration of the wrist examination. In addition, using the XperCT enables a reduction of the dose to the eye lens during head scans (skull base and ear examinations).
Resumo:
The aim of this research was to evaluate how fingerprint analysts would incorporate information from newly developed tools into their decision making processes. Specifically, we assessed effects using the following: (1) a quality tool to aid in the assessment of the clarity of the friction ridge details, (2) a statistical tool to provide likelihood ratios representing the strength of the corresponding features between compared fingerprints, and (3) consensus information from a group of trained fingerprint experts. The measured variables for the effect on examiner performance were the accuracy and reproducibility of the conclusions against the ground truth (including the impact on error rates) and the analyst accuracy and variation for feature selection and comparison.¦The results showed that participants using the consensus information from other fingerprint experts demonstrated more consistency and accuracy in minutiae selection. They also demonstrated higher accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in the decisions reported. The quality tool also affected minutiae selection (which, in turn, had limited influence on the reported decisions); the statistical tool did not appear to influence the reported decisions.
Resumo:
The DRG classification provides a useful tool for the evaluation of hospital care. Indicators such as readmissions and mortality rates adjusted for the hospital Casemix could be adopted in Switzerland at the price of minor additions to the hospital discharge record. The additional information required to build patients histories and to identify the deaths occurring after hospital discharge is detailed.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is considered a representative outcome in the evaluation of chronic disease management initiatives emphasizing patient-centered care. We evaluated the association between receipt of processes-of-care (PoC) for diabetes and HRQoL. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used self-reported data from non-institutionalized adults with diabetes in a Swiss canton. Outcomes were the physical/mental composites of the short form health survey 12 (SF-12) physical composite score, mental composite score (PCS, MCS) and the Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life (ADDQoL). Main exposure variables were receipt of six PoC for diabetes in the past 12 months, and the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) score. We performed linear regressions to examine the association between PoC, PACIC and the three composites of HRQoL. RESULTS: Mean age of the 519 patients was 64.5 years (SD 11.3); 60% were male, 87% reported type 2 or undetermined diabetes and 48% had diabetes for over 10 years. Mean HRQoL scores were SF-12 PCS: 43.4 (SD 10.5), SF-12 MCS: 47.0 (SD 11.2) and ADDQoL: -1.6 (SD 1.6). In adjusted models including all six PoC simultaneously, receipt of influenza vaccine was associated with lower ADDQoL (β=-0.4, p≤0.01) and foot examination was negatively associated with SF-12 PCS (β=-1.8, p≤0.05). There was no association or trend towards a negative association when these PoC were reported as combined measures. PACIC score was associated only with the SF-12 MCS (β=1.6, p≤0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PoC for diabetes did not show a consistent association with HRQoL in a cross-sectional analysis. This may represent an effect lag time between time of process received and health-related quality of life. Further research is needed to study this complex phenomenon.
Resumo:
Cet article propose une approche globale de la santé des personnes lesbiennes, gays, bisexuelles, et transgenres (LGBT), où respect des singularités et non-jugement occupent une position centrale. Il invite à dépasser une vision centrée sur les risques liés au VIH. Pour qui n'a pas connu de questionnement en lien avec son orientation sexuelle ou son identité de genre, il est difficile de concevoir comment la découverte d'une caractéristique identitaire pendant l'enfance peut se transformer sous le regard des autres en un fardeau souvent invisible mais fréquemment associé avec une morbidité émotionnelle et médicale considérable. Cet article pose la question suivante : combien de personnes LGBT ressortent chaque semaine d'une consultation médicale sans avoir eu l'opportunité de bénéficier d'une écoute, d'un soutien et de soins adaptés ? [Abstract] This article offers a comprehensive approach to the health of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, where respect for diversity and non judgemental care play a central role. It calls for a health and medical vision that goes beyond HIV risk. For those who never had to question their own sexual orientation or gender identity, it is certainly difficult to understand how the discovery of one's identity trait in childhood or early adolescence can be transformed under social pressure into a burden which often remains invisible but is associated with considerable emotional and medical morbidity. This article raises the following question : How many LGBT patients go unnoticed every week, leaving the physician's office without an opportunity to receive appropriate listening, support and care ?