The Alps Vegetation Database - a geo-referenced community-level archive of all terrestrial plants occurring in the Alps.

Mountain ranges are biodiversity hotspots worldwide and provide refuge to many organisms under contemporary climate change. Gathering field information on mountain biodiversity over time is of primary importance to understand the response of biotic communities to climate changes. For plants, several long-term observation sites and networks of mountain biodiversity are emerging worldwide to gather field data and monitor altitudinal range shifts and community composition changes under contemporary climate change. Most of these monitoring sites, however, focus on alpine ecosystems and mountain summits, such as the global observation research initiative in alpine environments (GLORIA). Here we describe the Alps Vegetation Database, a comprehensive community level archive (GIVD ID EU-00-014) which aims at compiling all available geo-referenced vegetation plots from lowland forests to alpine grasslands across the greatest mountain range in Europe: the Alps. This research initiative was funded between 2008 and 2011 by the Danish Council for Independent Research and was part of a larger project to compare cross-scale plant community structure between the Alps and the Scandes. The Alps Vegetation Database currently harbours 35,731 geo-referenced vegetation plots and 5,023 valid taxa across Mediterranean, temperate and alpine environments. The data are mainly used by the main contributors of the Alps Vegetation Database in an ecoinformatics approach to test hypotheses related to plant macroecology and biogeography, but external proposals for joint collaborations are welcome.

Implementation study of a clinical prediction score to rule out cardiogenic chest pain in community: Cluster randomized trial

1.1 Fundamentals Chest pain is a common complaint in primary care patients (1 to 3% of all consultations) (1) and its aetiology can be miscellaneous, from harmless to potentially life threatening conditions. In primary care practice, the most prevalent aetiologies are: chest wall syndrome (43%), coronary heart disease (12%) and anxiety (7%) (2). In up to 20% of cases, potentially serious conditions as cardiac, respiratory or neoplasic diseases underlie chest pain. In this context, a large number of laboratory tests are run (42%) and over 16% of patients are referred to a specialist or hospitalized (2).¦A cardiovascular origin to chest pain can threaten patient's life and investigations run to exclude a serious condition can be expensive and involve a large number of exams or referral to specialist -­‐ often without real clinical need. In emergency settings, up to 80% of chest pains in patients are due to cardiovascular events (3) and scoring methods have been developed to identify conditions such as coronary heart disease (HD) quickly and efficiently (4-­‐6). In primary care, a cardiovascular origin is present in only about 12% of patients with chest pain (2) and general practitioners (GPs) need to exclude as safely as possible a potential serious condition underlying chest pain. A simple clinical prediction rule (CPR) like those available in emergency settings may therefore help GPs and spare time and extra investigations in ruling out CHD in primary care patients. Such a tool may also help GPs reassure patients with more common origin to chest pain.

Efficacy of clinical guideline implementation to improve the appropriateness of chest physiotherapy prescription among inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND: Although there is no strong evidence of benefit, chest physiotherapy (CP) seems to be commonly used in simple pneumonia. CP requires equipment and frequently involves the assistance of a respiratory therapist, engendering a significant medical workload and cost. AIM: To measure and compare the efficacy of two modalities of chest physiotherapy (CP) guideline implementation on the appropriateness of CP prescription among patients hospitalised for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We measured the CP prescription rate and duration in all consecutive CAP inpatients admitted in a division of general internal medicine at an urban teaching community hospital during three consecutive one-year time periods: (1) before any guideline implementation; (2) after a passive implementation by medical grand rounds and guideline diffusion through mailing; (3) after adding a one-page reminder in the CAP patient's medical chart highlighting our recommendations. Death and recurrent hospitalisation rates within one year after hospitalisation were recorded to assess whether CP prescription reduction, if any, impaired patient outcomes. RESULTS: During the three successive phases, 127, 157, and 147 patients with similar characteristics were included. Among all CAP inpatients, the CP prescription rate decreased from 68% (86/127) to 51% (80/157), and to 48% (71/147), respectively (P for trend <0.01 for trend). A significant reduction in CP duration was observed after the active guideline implementation (12.0, 11.0, 7.0days, respectively) and persisted after adjustment for length of stay. Reductions in CP prescription rate and duration were also observed among CAP patients with COPD CP prescription rate: 97% (30/31), 67% (24/36), 75% (35/47), respectively (P<0.01 for trend). The mean cost of CP per patient was reduced by 56%, from $709 to $481, and to $309, respectively. Neither the in-hospital deaths, the one-year overall recurrent hospitalisation nor the one-year CAP-specific recurrent hospitalisation significantly differed between the three phases. CONCLUSION: Both passive and active implementation of guidelines appear to improve the appropriateness of CP prescription among inpatients with CAP without impairing their outcomes. Restricting CP use to patients who benefit from this treatment might be an opportunity to decrease CAP medical cost and workload.