3 resultados para medically fragile
em DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center
Resumo:
The purpose of this Continuing Education Course is to provide oral health professionals with information to address the unique dental needs of medically complex children. The objective is to train dentists to treat special needs patients so these children have more access to oral healthcare. ^ Under the auspice of Dell Children Hospital of Austin, Lisa Jacob DDS MS is administering this Continuing Education Course for dentists and dental staff from the 46 counties of central Texas served by the hospital.^ Needs assessment was determined through a survey questionnaire to collect data about the number of special needs patients seen by general dentists in Central Texas.^ In recent years, an increasing number of continuing education courses have been developed to help dentists learn techniques for providing dentistry in more understanding ways to patients with special needs. Dentists and dental staff are trained to provide care specifically in dentistry, regardless of who the patient is. This means dentists can perform a clinical examination, carry out procedures to diagnose and treat oral diseases, and provide restorations such as fillings and crowns. ^ Four prominent speakers will provide an instructional tool to address the need for dentists to increase their competence and comfort level in caring for individuals with developmental disabilities. Each speaker will address one of the most frequently encountered cases of medically complex children. The four topics selected by Dr. Lisa Jacob are Cancer, Mental Disability, Downs Syndrome, and Craniofacial Syndromes.^ The public health implications of this continuing education course are presented in providing dental service to this underserved population. When general dentist turn away patients with special needs because of lack of knowledge to treat them, these patients will, more than likely, postpone or abandon needed dental visits because of difficulties reaching pediatric dentists who may not be available in certain areas.^
Resumo:
Identifying accurate numbers of soldiers determined to be medically not ready after completing soldier readiness processing may help inform Army leadership about ongoing pressures on the military involved in long conflict with regular deployment. In Army soldiers screened using the SRP checklist for deployment, what is the prevalence of soldiers determined to be medically not ready? Study group. 15,289 soldiers screened at all 25 Army deployment platform sites with the eSRP checklist over a 4-month period (June 20, 2009 to October 20, 2009). The data included for analysis included age, rank, component, gender and final deployment medical readiness status from MEDPROS database. Methods.^ This information was compiled and univariate analysis using chi-square was conducted for each of the key variables by medical readiness status. Results. Descriptive epidemiology Of the total sample 1548 (9.7%) were female and 14319 (90.2%) were male. Enlisted soldiers made up 13,543 (88.6%) of the sample and officers 1,746 (11.4%). In the sample, 1533 (10.0%) were soldiers over the age of 40 and 13756 (90.0%) were age 18-40. Reserve, National Guard and Active Duty made up 1,931 (12.6%), 2,942 (19.2%) and 10,416 (68.1%) respectively. Univariate analysis. Overall 1226 (8.0%) of the soldiers screened were determined to be medically not ready for deployment. Biggest predictive factor was female gender OR (2.8; 2.57-3.28) p<0.001. Followed by enlisted rank OR (2.01; 1.60-2.53) p<0.001. Reserve component OR (1.33; 1.16-1.53) p<0.001 and Guard OR (0.37; 0.30-0.46) p<0.001. For age > 40 demonstrated OR (1.2; 1.09-1.50) p<0.003. Overall the results underscore there may be key demographic groups relating to medical readiness that can be targeted with programs and funding to improve overall military medical readiness.^
Resumo:
This report describes the development of a Markov model for comparing percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in terms of their cost-utility in treating isolated liver metastases from colorectal cancer. The model is based on data from multiple retrospective and prospective studies, available data on different utility states associated with treatment and complications, as well as publicly available Medicare costs. The purpose of this report is to establish a well-justified model for clinical management decisions. In comparison with SBRT, RFA is the most cost-effective treatment for this patient population. From the societal perspective, SBRT may be an acceptable alternative with an ICER of $28,673/QALY. ^