Le rôle des professionnel-le-s de l'action médico-sociale dans la prévention de la violence conjugale

[Introduction] Si la violence conjugale est désormais déclarée par les médias .problème de santé publique», la responsabilité et la fonctiondes professionnel.le.sdel'action médico-sociale dans sa prévention reste encore à développer. Cetarticle souhaite stimuler la réflexion et l'action dans ce domaine, en se fondant sur l'expérience d'un programme Interdisciplinaire de prévention de la violence mené depuis janvier 2000 dans le canton de Vaud.

Exclusion of pulmonary embolism using C-reactive protein and D-dimer. A prospective comparison.

Our goal was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of C-reactive protein (CRP) alone or combined with clinical probability assessment in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE), and to compare its performance to a D-dimer assay. We conducted a prospective study in which we performed a common immuno-turbidimetric CRP test and a rapid enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) D-dimer test in 259 consecutive outpatients with suspected PE at the emergency department of a teaching hospital. We assessed clinical probability of PE by a validated prediction rule overridden by clinical judgment. Patients with D-dimer levels > or = 500 microg/l underwent a work-up consisting of lower-limb venous ultrasound, spiral computerized tomography, ventilation-perfusion scan, or pulmonary angiography. Patients were followed up for three months. Seventy-seven (30%) of the patients had PE. The CRP alone had a sensitivity of 84% (95% confidence interval [CI).: 74 to 92%) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 87% (95% CI: 78 to 93%) at a cutpoint of 5 mg/l. Overall, 61 (24%) patients with a low clinical probability of PE had a CRP < 5 mg/l. Due to the low prevalence of PE (9%) in this subgroup, the NPV increased to 97% (95% CI: 89 to 100%). The D-dimer (cutpoint 500 micro g/l) showed a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 95 to 100%) and a NPV of 100% (95% CI: 94 to 100%) irrespective of clinical probability and accurately rule out PE in 56 (22%) patients. Standard CRP tests alone or combined with clinical probability assessment cannot safely exclude PE.