Projects GNOME and SEDAN : the PLOWSHARE program /

"DNA 6029F."

Cancer statistics review.

Data derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program and the National Center for Health Statistics.

The development impact of counterpart funds : a review of the literature /

Mode of access: Internet.

Quality improvement through the computerized internal control review (CICR) system.

Shipping list no.: 89-358-P.

Negotiating, Communicating, Collaborating: A Sociocultural View of Online Program Development

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 2016-05

A review of telemedicine and asthma

The literature contains a number of reports of early work involving telemedicine and chronic disease; however, there are comparatively few studies in asthma. Most of the telemedicine studies in asthma have investigated the use of remote monitoring of patients in the home, e.g. transmitting spirometry data via a telephone modem to a central server. The primary objective of these studies was to improve management. A secondary benefit was that patient adherence to prescribed treatment is also likely to be improved. Early results are encouraging; home monitoring in a randomized controlled trial in Japan significantly reduced the number of emergency room visits by patients with poorly controlled asthma. Other studies have described the cost-benefits of a specialist asthma nurse who can manage patients by telephone contact, as well as deliver asthma education. Many web-based systems are available for the general public or healthcare professionals to improve education in asthma, although their quality is highly variable. The work on telemedicine in asthma clearly shows that the technique holds promise in a number of areas. Unfortunately - as in telemedicine generally - most of the literature in patients with asthma refers to pilot trials and feasibility studies, with short-term outcomes. Large-scale, formal research trials are required to establish the cost effectiveness of telemedicine in asthma.

Multidisciplinary strategies for the management of heart failure patients at high risk for admission - A systematic review of randomized trials

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine whether multidisciplinary strategies improve outcomes for heart failure (HF) patients. BACKGROUND Because the prognosis of HF remains poor despite pharmacotherapy, there is increasing interest in alternative models of care delivery for these patients. METHODS Randomized trials of multidisciplinary management programs in HF were identified by searching electronic databases and bibliographies and via contact with experts. RESULTS Twenty-nine trials (5,039 patients) were identified but were not pooled, because of considerable heterogeneity. A priori, we divided the interventions into homogeneous groups that were suitable for pooling. Strategies that incorporated follow-up by a specialized multidisciplinary team (either in a clinic or a non-clinic setting) reduced mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59 to 0.96), HF hospitalizations (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.87), and all-cause hospitalizations (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.92). Programs that focused on enhancing patient self-care activities reduced HF hospitalizations (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.83) and all-cause hospitalizations (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.93) but had no effect on mortality (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.94). Strategies that employed telephone contact and advised patients to attend their primary care physician in the event of deterioration reduced HF hospitalizations (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.99) but not mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.29) or all-cause hospitalizations (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.20). In 15 of 18 trials that evaluated cost, multidisciplinary strategies were cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS Multidisciplinary strategies for the management of patients with HF reduce HF hospitalizations. Those programs that involve specialized follow-up by a multidisciplinary team also reduce mortality and all-cause hospitalizations. (C) 2004 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

A systematic review of laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy

Background. A systematic review was undertaken to assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy (LLDN) compared with open live-donor nephrectomy (OLDN). Methods. Literature databases were searched from inception to March 2003 inclusive. Comparative studies of LLDN versus OLDN (randomized and nonrandomized) were included. Results. There were 44 included studies, and the quality of the available evidence was average. There was only one randomized controlled trial and six nonrandomized comparative studies with concurrent controls identified. In terms of safety, for donors, there did not seem to be any distinct difference between the laparoscopic and open approaches. No donor mortality was reported for either procedure, and the complication rates were similar although the types of complications experienced differed between the two procedures. The conversion rate for LLDN to an open procedure ranged from 0% to 13%. In terms of efficacy, LLDN seemed to be a slower operation with longer warm ischemia. times than OLDN, but this did not seem to have resulted in increased rates of delayed graft function for recipients. Donor postoperative recovery and convalescence seemed to be superior for LLDN, making it a potentially more attractive operation for living donors. Although in the short-term, graft function and survival did not seem to differ between the two techniques, long-term complication rates and allograft function could not be determined and further long-term follow-up is required. Conclusions. LLDN seems to be at least as safe and efficacious as OLDN in the short-term. However, it remains a technique in evolution. Further high-quality studies are required to resolve some of the outstanding issues surrounding its use, in particular, long-term follow-up of donor complications and recipient graft function and survival.

Early practical experience and the social responsiveness of clinical education: Systematic review

Objectives To find how early experience in clinical and community settings (early experience) affects medical education, and identify strengths and limitations of the available evidence. Design A systematic review rating, by consensus, the strength and importance of outcomes reported in the decade 1992-2001. Data sources Bibliographical databases and journals were searched for publications on the topic, reviewed under the auspices of the recently formed Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) collaboration. Selection of studies All empirical studies (verifiable, observational data) were included, whatever their design, method, or language of publication. Results Early experience was most commonly provided in community settings, aiming to recruit primary care practitioners for underserved populations. It increased the popularity of primary care residencies, albeit among self selected students. It fostered self awareness and empathic attitudes towards ill people, boosted students' confidence, motivated them, gave them satisfaction, and helped them develop a professional identity. By helping develop interpersonal skills, it made entering clerkships a less stressful experience. Early experience helped students learn about professional roles and responsibilities, healthcare systems, and health needs of a population. It made biomedical, behavioural, and social sciences more relevant and easier to learn. It motivated and rewarded teachers and patients and enriched curriculums. In some countries,junior students provided preventive health care directly to underserved populations. Conclusion Early experience helps medical students learn, helps them develop appropriate attitudes towards their studies and future practice, and orientates medical curriculums towards society's needs. Experimental evidence of its benefit is unlikely to be forthcoming and yet more medical schools are likely to provide it. Effort could usefully be concentrated on evaluating the methods and outcomes of early experience provided within non-experimental research designs, and using that evaluation to improve the quality of curriculums.

Community-based programs to promote care seat restraints in children 0-16 years - A systematic review

Study Objective: Community-based models for injury prevention have become an accepted part of the overall injury control strategy. This systematic review of the scientific literature examines the evidence for their effectiveness in reducing injury due to inadequate car seat restraint use in children 0-16 years of age. Methods: A comprehensive search of the literature was performed using the following study selection criteria: community-based intervention study: target population was children aged 0-16 years of age; outcome measure was either injury rates due to motor vehicle crashes or observed changes in child restraint use; and use of community control or historical control in the study design. Quality assessment and data abstraction was guided by a standardized procedure and performed independently by two authors. Data synthesis was in tabular and text form with meta-analysis not being possible due to the discrepancy in methods and measures between the studies. Results: This review found eight studies, that met all the inclusion criteria. In the studies that measured injury outcomes, significant reductions in risk of motor vehicle occupant injury (33-55%) were reported in the study communities. For those studies reporting observed car seat restraint use the community-based programs were successful in increasing toddler restraint use in 1-5 year aged children by up to 11%; child booster seat use in 4-8 year aged children by up to 13%; rear restraint use in children aged 0-15 years by 8%; a 50% increase in restraint use in pre-school aged children in a high-risk community; and a 44% increase in children aged 5-11 years. Conclusion: While this review highlights that there is some evidence to support the effectiveness of community-based programs to promote car restraint use and/or motor vehicle occupant injury, limitations in the evaluation methodologies of the studies requires the results to be interpreted with caution. There is clearly a need for further high quality program evaluation research to develop an evidence base. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

How can experience in clinical and community settings contribute to early medical education? A BEME systematic review

Review date: Review period January 1992-December 2001. Final analysis July 2004-January 2005. Background and review context: There has been no rigorous systematic review of the outcomes of early exposure to clinical and community settings in medical education. Objectives of review: (1) Identify published empirical evidence of the effects of early experience in medical education, analyse it, and synthesize conclusions from it. (2) Identify the strengths and limitations of the research effort to date, and identify objectives for future research. Search strategy: Ovid search of. BEI, ERIC, Medline, CIATAHL and EMBASE Additional electronic searches of: Psychinfo, Timelit, EBM reviews, SIGLE, and the Cochrane databases. Hand-searches of: Medical Education, Medical Teacher, Academic Medicine, Teaching and Learning in Medicine, Advances in Health Sciences Education, Journal of Educational Psychology. Criteria: Definitions: Experience: Authentic (real as opposed to simulated) human contact in a social or clinical context that enhances learning of health, illness and/or disease, and the role of the health professional. Early: What would traditionally have been regarded as the preclinical phase, usually the first 2 years. Inclusions: All empirical studies (verifiable, observational data) of early experience in the basic education of health professionals, whatever their design or methodology, including papers not in English. Evidence from other health care professions that could be applied to medicine was included. Exclusions: Not empirical; not early; post-basic; simulated rather than 'authentic' experience. Data collection: Careful validation of selection processes. Coding by two reviewers onto an extensively modified version of the standard BEME coding sheet. Accumulation into an Access database. Secondary coding and synthesis of an interpretation. Headline results: A total of 73 studies met the selection criteria and yielded 277 educational outcomes; 116 of those outcomes (from 38 studies) were rated strong and important enough to include in a narrative synthesis of results; 76% of those outcomes were from descriptive studies and 24% from comparative studies. Early experience motivated and satisfied students of the health professions and helped them acclimatize to clinical environments, develop professionally, interact with patients with more confidence and less stress, develop self-reflection and appraisal skill, and develop a professional identity. It strengthened their learning and made it more real and relevant to clinical practice. It helped students learn about the structure and function of the healthcare system, and about preventive care and the role of health professionals. It supported the learning of both biomedical and behavioural/social sciences and helped students acquire communication and basic clinical skills. There were outcomes for beneficiaries other than students, including teachers, patients, populations, organizations and specialties. Early experience increased recruitment to primary care/rural medical practice, though mainly in US studies which introduced it for that specific purpose as part of a complex intervention. Conclusions: Early experience helps medical students socialize to their chosen profession. It. helps them acquire a range of subject matter and makes their learning more real and relevant. It has potential benefits for other stakeholders, notably teachers and patients. It can influence career choices.