27 resultados para unequal access
em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça
Resumo:
There is a paucity of data on the success rates of achieving percutaneous epicardial access in different groups of patients.
Resumo:
Vascular access patency is of vital importance for patients requiring haemodialysis. This analysis validates potential risk factors and benefits in patients undergoing vascular access procedures.
Resumo:
Specialized pediatric cancer centers (PCCs) are thought to be essential to obtain state-of-the-art care for children and adolescents. We determined the proportion of childhood cancer patients not treated in a PCC, and described their characteristics and place of treatment.
Resumo:
Objective. To assess differences in access to antiretroviral treatment (ART) and patient outcomes across public sector treatment facilities in the Free State province, South Africa. Design. Prospective cohort study with retrospective database linkage. We analysed data on patients enrolled in the treatment programme across 36 facilities between May 2004 and December 2007, and assessed percentage initiating ART and percentage dead at 1 year after enrolment. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate associations of facility-level and patient-level characteristics with both mortality and treatment status. Results. Of 44 866 patients enrolled, 15 219 initiated treatment within 1 year; 8 778 died within 1 year, 7 286 before accessing ART. Outcomes at 1 year varied greatly across facilities and more variability was explained by facility-level factors than by patient-level factors. The odds of starting treatment within 1 year improved over calendar time. Patients enrolled in facilities with treatment initiation available on site had higher odds of starting treatment and lower odds of death at 1 year compared with those enrolled in facilities that did not offer treatment initiation. Patients were less likely to start treatment if they were male, severely immunosuppressed (CD4 count ≤50 cells/μl), or underweight (<50 kg). Men were also more likely to die in the first year after enrolment. Conclusions. Although increasing numbers of patients started ART between 2004 and 2007, many patients died before accessing ART. Patient outcomes could be improved by decentralisation of treatment services, fast-tracking the most immunodeficient patients and improving access, especially for men.
Resumo:
The ACCESS trial examined the 12-month effectiveness of continuous therapeutic assertive community treatment (ACT) as part of integrated care compared to standard care in a catchment area comparison design in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders treated with quetiapine immediate release.
Resumo:
Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a treatment option for high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Previous reports focused on a single device or access site, whereas little is known of the combined use of different devices and access sites as selected by the heart team. The purpose of this study is to investigate clinical outcomes of TAVI using different devices and access sites. Methods A consecutive cohort of 200 patients underwent TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving system (Medtronic Core Valve LLC, Irvine, CA; n = 130) or the Edwards SAPIEN valve (Edwards Lifesciences LLC, Irvine, CA; n = 70) implanted by either the transfemoral or transapical access route. Results Device success and procedure success were 99% and 95%, respectively, without differences between devices and access site. All-cause mortality was 7.5% at 30 days, with no differences between valve types or access sites. Using multivariable analysis, low body mass index (<20 kg/m2) (odds ratio [OR] 6.6, 95% CI 1.5-29.5) and previous stroke (OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.2-16.8) were independent risk factors for short-term mortality. The VARC-defined combined safety end point occurred in 18% of patients and was driven by major access site complications (8.0%), life-threatening bleeding (8.5%) or severe renal failure (4.5%). Transapical access emerged as independent predictor of adverse outcome for the Valve Academic Research Consortium–combined safety end point (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5-7.1). Conclusion A heart team–based selection of devices and access site among patients undergoing TAVI resulted in high device and procedural success. Low body mass index and history of previous stroke were independent predictors of mortality. Transapical access emerged as a risk factor for the Valve Academic Research Consortium–combined safety end point.
Resumo:
When it comes to helping to shape sustainable development, research is most useful when it bridges the science–implementation/management gap and when it brings development specialists and researchers into a dialogue (Hurni et al. 2004); can a peer-reviewed journal contribute to this aim? In the classical system for validation and dissemination of scientific knowledge, journals focus on knowledge exchange within the academic community and do not specifically address a ‘life-world audience’. Within a North-South context, another knowledge divide is added: the peer review process excludes a large proportion of scientists from the South from participating in the production of scientific knowledge (Karlsson et al. 2007). Mountain Research and Development (MRD) is a journal whose mission is based on an editorial strategy to build the bridge between research and development and ensure that authors from the global South have access to knowledge production, ultimately with a view to supporting sustainable development in mountains. In doing so, MRD faces a number of challenges that we would like to discuss with the td-net community, after having presented our experience and strategy as editors of this journal. MRD was launched in 1981 by mountain researchers who wanted mountains to be included in the 1992 Rio process. In the late 1990s, MRD realized that the journal needed to go beyond addressing only the scientific community. It therefore launched a new section addressing a broader audience in 2000, with the aim of disseminating insights into, and recommendations for, the implementation of sustainable development in mountains. In 2006, we conducted a survey among MRD’s authors, reviewers, and readers (Wymann et al. 2007): respondents confirmed that MRD had succeeded in bridging the gap between research and development. But we realized that MRD could become an even more efficient tool for sustainability if development knowledge were validated: in 2009, we began submitting ‘development’ papers (‘transformation knowledge’) to external peer review of a kind different from the scientific-only peer review (for ‘systems knowledge’). At the same time, the journal became open access in order to increase the permeability between science and society, and ensure greater access for readers and authors in the South. We are currently rethinking our review process for development papers, with a view to creating more space for communication between science and society, and enhancing the co-production of knowledge (Roux 2008). Hopefully, these efforts will also contribute to the urgent debate on the ‘publication culture’ needed in transdisciplinary research (Kueffer et al. 2007).