Range of Motion of the Upper Extremity in a Healthy Pediatric Population: Introduction to Normative Data.

Objective In the pediatric population traumatic injuries of the upper extremity are common. After therapy a decision has to be made if the mobility of the joint lies within a normal range. The purpose of this study was to give an introduction to normative data. We investigate if there is a significant difference in the range of motion (ROM) between male and female probands and furthermore, if an effect of the age can be detected. Methods We performed an institutional review board-approved study of healthy girls and boys aged between 2 and 16 years without any medical history of an upper extremity fracture. We investigated the active ROM of the elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal, and interphalangeal joints. Furthermore, age, handedness, weight, and height were recorded. A total of 171 adolescents with a mean age of 10.6 years were included and separated into four cohorts by age: 2 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 13, and 14 to 16 years. Results We found significant differences between the genders in the age group from 11 to 13 years for the flexion of the elbow, the pronation, the flexion of the interphalangeal joint of the thumb, as well as the flexion of the metacarpophalangeal joints of digitus II to V. Furthermore, a significant difference in the same joints except from the elbow flexion could be demonstrated between the genders. Conclusion Our study contributes normative data for upper extremity ROM in the pediatric population and presents a gender-related difference in certain joints. Clinical Relevance Normative data for the ROM of upper extremity joints in children is helpful for the evaluation of pediatric orthopedic patients and provides the framework for therapeutic resolution. Since a great number of traumatic injuries in children affect the upper extremity, this information may help the physician to estimate the impact of the injury and decide on the therapeutic management.

Predicting the onset of psychosis in patients at clinical high risk: practical guide to probabilistic prognostic reasoning

Prediction of psychosis in patients at clinical high risk (CHR) has become a mainstream focus of clinical and research interest worldwide. When using CHR instruments for clinical purposes, the predicted outcome is but only a probability; and, consequently, any therapeutic action following the assessment is based on probabilistic prognostic reasoning. Yet, probabilistic reasoning makes considerable demands on the clinicians. We provide here a scholarly practical guide summarising the key concepts to support clinicians with probabilistic prognostic reasoning in the CHR state. We review risk or cumulative incidence of psychosis in, person-time rate of psychosis, Kaplan-Meier estimates of psychosis risk, measures of prognostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity in receiver operator characteristic curves, positive and negative predictive values, Bayes’ theorem, likelihood ratios, potentials and limits of real-life applications of prognostic probabilistic reasoning in the CHR state. Understanding basic measures used for prognostic probabilistic reasoning is a prerequisite for successfully implementing the early detection and prevention of psychosis in clinical practice. Future refinement of these measures for CHR patients may actually influence risk management, especially as regards initiating or withholding treatment.

Computer-based summative assessment of clinical reasoning in clerkships: A mixed-method comparison of key feature problems with case-based multiple choice questions

Background: It is yet unclear if there are differences between using electronic key feature problems (KFPs) or electronic case-based multiple choice questions (cbMCQ) for the assessment of clinical decision making. Summary of Work: Fifth year medical students were exposed to clerkships which ended with a summative exam. Assessment of knowledge per exam was done by 6-9 KFPs, 9-20 cbMCQ and 9-28 MC questions. Each KFP consisted of a case vignette and three key features (KF) using “long menu” as question format. We sought students’ perceptions of the KFPs and cbMCQs in focus groups (n of students=39). Furthermore statistical data of 11 exams (n of students=377) concerning the KFPs and (cb)MCQs were compared. Summary of Results: The analysis of the focus groups resulted in four themes reflecting students’ perceptions of KFPs and their comparison with (cb)MCQ: KFPs were perceived as (i) more realistic, (ii) more difficult, (iii) more motivating for the intense study of clinical reasoning than (cb)MCQ and (iv) showed an overall good acceptance when some preconditions are taken into account. The statistical analysis revealed that there was no difference in difficulty; however KFP showed a higher discrimination and reliability (G-coefficient) even when corrected for testing times. Correlation of the different exam parts was intermediate. Conclusions: Students perceived the KFPs as more motivating for the study of clinical reasoning. Statistically KFPs showed a higher discrimination and higher reliability than cbMCQs. Take-home messages: Including KFPs with long menu questions into summative clerkship exams seems to offer positive educational effects.

Examination of the influence of behavioral, normative and control beliefs on the adherence to a prescribed renal diet among elderly populations with chronic to end-stage renal disease

The 1999-2004 prevalence of chronic kidney disease in adults 20 year or older (15.5 million) is an estimated 7.69%. The risk of developing CKD is exacerbated by diabetes, hypertension and/or a family history of kidney disease. African Americans, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, and the elderly are more susceptible to higher incidence of CKD. The challenges of aging coupled with co-morbidities such as kidney disease raises the potential for malnutrition among elderly (for the purpose of this study 55 years or older) populations. Lack of adherence to prescribed nutrition guidelines specific to renal failure jeopardizes body homeostasis and increases the likelihood of future morbidity and resultant mortality. The relationship and synergy that exists between diet and disease is evident. Clinical experience with renal patients has indicated the importance of adherence to diet therapy specific to kidney disease. Extension investigation of diet adherence among endstage renal disease patients revealed a sizeable dearth in the current literature. This thesis study was undertaken to help reduce that void. The study design is qualitative and descriptive. Support, cooperation, and collaboration were provided by the University of Texas Nephrology Department, University of Texas Physicians, and DaVita Dialysis Centers. Approximately 105 male and female chronic to end-stage kidney disease patients were approached to participate in elicitation interviews in dialysis treatment facilities regarding their present diet beliefs and practices. Eighty-five were recruited and agreed to participate. Inclusion criteria required individuals to be between 35-90 years of age; capable of completing a 5-10 minute interview; and English speaking. Each kidney patient was asked seven (7) non-leading questions developed from the constructs of the Theory of Planned Behavior. The study presents a descriptive comparison of behavioral, normative, and control beliefs that influence adherence to renal diets by age, race, and gender. The study successfully concluded that behavioral, normative, and control beliefs of chronic to end-stage renal patients promoted execution and adherence to prescribed nutrition. This study provides valuable information for dietitians, technicians, nurses, and physicians to assess patient compliance toward prescribed nutrition and the means to support or improve that performance. ^

Understanding and Characterizing Shared Decision-Making and Behavioral Intent in Medical Uncertainty

Applying Theoretical Constructs to Address Medical Uncertainty Situations involving medical reasoning usually include some level of medical uncertainty. Despite the identification of shared decision-making (SDM) as an effective technique, it has been observed that the likelihood of physicians and patients engaging in shared decision making is lower in those situations where it is most needed; specifically in circumstances of medical uncertainty. Having identified shared decision making as an effective, yet often a neglected approach to resolving a lack of information exchange in situations involving medical uncertainty, the next step is to determine the way(s) in which SDM can be integrated and the supplemental processes that may facilitate its integration. SDM involves unique types of communication and relationships between patients and physicians. Therefore, it is necessary to further understand and incorporate human behavioral elements - in particular, behavioral intent - in order to successfully identify and realize the potential benefits of SDM. This paper discusses the background and potential interaction between the theories of shared decision-making, medical uncertainty, and behavioral intent. Identifying Shared Decision-Making Elements in Medical Encounters Dealing with Uncertainty A recent summary of the state of medical knowledge in the U.S. reported that nearly half (47%) of all treatments were of unknown effectiveness, and an additional 7% involved an uncertain tradeoff between benefits and harms. Shared decision-making (SDM) was identified as an effective technique for managing uncertainty when two or more parties were involved. In order to understand which of the elements of SDM are used most frequently and effectively, it is necessary to identify these key elements, and understand how these elements related to each other and the SDM process. The elements identified through the course of the present research were selected from basic principles of the SDM model and the “Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom” (DIKW) Hierarchy. The goal of this ethnographic research was to identify which common elements of shared decision-making patients are most often observed applying in the medical encounter. The results of the present study facilitated the understanding of which elements patients were more likely to exhibit during a primary care medical encounter, as well as determining variables of interest leading to more successful shared decision-making practices between patients and their physicians. Understanding Behavioral Intent to Participate in Shared Decision-Making in Medically Uncertain Situations Objective: This article describes the process undertaken to identify and validate behavioral and normative beliefs and behavioral intent of men between the ages of 45-70 with regard to participating in shared decision-making in medically uncertain situations. This article also discusses the preliminary results of the aforementioned processes and explores potential future uses of this information which may facilitate greater understanding, efficiency and effectiveness of doctor-patient consultations.Design: Qualitative Study using deductive content analysisSetting: Individual semi-structure patient interviews were conducted until data saturation was reached. Researchers read the transcripts and developed a list of codes.Subjects: 25 subjects drawn from the Philadelphia community.Measurements: Qualitative indicators were developed to measure respondents’ experiences and beliefs related to behavioral intent to participate in shared decision-making during medical uncertainty. Subjects were also asked to complete the Krantz Health Opinion Survey as a method of triangulation.Results: Several factors were repeatedly described by respondents as being essential to participate in shared decision-making in medical uncertainty. These factors included past experience with medical uncertainty, an individual’s personality, and the relationship between the patient and his physician.Conclusions: The findings of this study led to the development of a category framework that helped understand an individual’s needs and motivational factors in their intent to participate in shared decision-making. The three main categories include 1) an individual’s representation of medically uncertainty, 2) how the individual copes with medical uncertainty, and 3) the individual’s behavioral intent to seek information and participate in shared decision-making during times of medically uncertain situations.