Brain natriuretic peptide: Disease marker or more in cardiovascular medicine?

Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) is predominantly a cardiac ventricular hormone that promotes natriuresis and diuresis, inhibits the renin-anglotensin-aldosterone axis, and is a vasodilator. Plasma BNP levels are raised in essential hypertension, and more so in left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy and heart failure. Plasma BNP levels are also elevated in ischemic heart disease. Attempts have been made to use plasma BNP levels as a marker of LV dysfunction, but these have shown that plasma BNP levels are probably not sensitive enough to replace echocardiography in the diagnosis of LV dysfunction. Pericardial BNP or N-BNP may be more suitable markers of LV dysfunction. Plasma BNP levels are also elevated in right ventricular dysfunction, pregnancy-induced hypertension, aortic stenosis, age, subarachnoid hemorrhage, cardiac allograft rejection and cavopulmonary connection, and BNP may have an important pathophysiological role in some or all of these conditions. Clinical trials have demonstrated the natriuretic, diuretic and vasodilator effects, as well as inhibitory effects on renin and aldosterone of infused synthetic human BNP (nesiritide) in healthy humans. BNP infusion improves LV function in patients with congestive heart failure via a vasodilating and a prominent natriuretic effect. BNP infusion is useful for the treatment of decompensated congestive heart failure requiring hospitalization. The clinical potential of BNP is limited as it is a peptide and requires infusion. Drugs that modify the effects of BNP are furthering our understanding of the pathophysiological role and clinical potential of BNP. Increasing the effects of BNP may be a useful therapeutic approach in heart failure involving LV dysfunction. The levels of plasma BNP are increased by blockers, cardiac glycosides and vasopeptidase inhibitors, and this may contribute to the usefulness of these agents in heart failure. (C) 2001 Prous Science. All rights reserved.

The Building Partnerships Program: An Approach to Community-based Learning for Medical Students in Australia

The Building Partnerships Program at the University of Queensland, Australia seeks to address the dual challenge of preparing doctors who are responsive to the community while providing a meaningful context for social sciences learning. Through partnerships with a diverse range of community agencies, the program offers students opportunities to gain non-clinical perspectives on health and illness through structured learning activities including: family visits; community agency visits and attachments; and interview training. Students learn first-hand about psychosocial influences on health and how people manage health problems on a day-to-day basis. They also gain insights into the work of community agencies and how they as future doctors might work in partnership with them to enhance patient care. We outline the main components of the program, identify challenges and successes from student and community agency perspectives, and consider areas that invite further development.

An evaluative case study of a psychological skills training program for athletes with intellectual disabilities

The purpose was to develop an evaluative case study of six 3-hr sessions, spaced over 3 months, of psychological skills training (PST) provided to athletes with an intellectual disability who were training for the Basketball Australia State Championships. Participants were 7 males and 7 females, aged 15.8 to 27.1 years, with a receptive language level of 7 to 13.7 years, 2 female coaches, 2 psychologists, and I registered psychologist supervisor. Sessions focused specifically on stress management, with primary attention given to cue words, breathing techniques, and positive thinking. Findings, based on interviews and participant observations, revealed that all participants believed that the PST was appropriate and worthwhile.

Barriers to effective cancer pain management: A survey of hospitalized cancer patients in Australia

The purpose of this study was to examine attitudinal barriers to effective pain management in a consecutively recruited cohort of 114 cancer patients from four Australian hospitals. When surveyed, 48% of this sample reported experiencing pain within the previous 24 hours. Of these, 56% reported this pain to be distressing, horrible or excruciating, with large proportions indicating that this pain had affected their movement, sleep and emotional well-being. Three factors were identified as potentially impacting on patients responses to pain-poor levels of patient knowledge about pain, low perceived control over pain, and a deficit in communication about pain. A trend for older patients to experience more severe pain was also identified. These older patients reported being more willing to tolerate pain and perceive less control over their pain. Suggestions are made for developing patient education programs and farther research using concepts drawn from broader social and behavioral models. J Pain Symptom Manage 2002:23:393-405. (C) U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee, 2002.

A formal model of real-time program compilation

Program compilation can be formally defined as a sequence of equivalence-preserving transformations, or refinements, from high-level language programs to assembler code, Recent models also incorporate timing properties, but the resulting formalisms are intimidatingly complex. Here we take advantage of a new, simple model of real-time refinement, based on predicate transformer semantics, to present a straightforward compilation formalism that incorporates real-time constraints. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Whither our Art? Clinical Wisdom & Evidence-based Medicine

The relationship between evidence-based medicine (EBM) and clinical judgement is the subject of conceptual and practical dispute. For example, EBM and clinical guidelines are seen to increasingly dominate medical decision-making at the expense of other, human elements, and to threaten the art of medicine. Clinical wisdom always remains open to question. We want to know why particular beliefs are held, and the epistemological status of claims based in wisdom or experience. The paper critically appraises a number of claims and distinctions, and attempts to clarify the connections between EBM, clinical experience and judgement, and the objective and evaluative categories of medicine. I conclude that to demystify clinical wisdom is not to devalue it. EBM ought not be conceived as needing to be limited or balanced by clinical wisdom, since if its language is translatable into terms comprehensible and applicable to individuals, it helps constitute clinical wisdom. Failure to appreciate this constitutive relation will help perpetuate medical paternalism and delay the adoption of properly evidence-based practice, which would be both unethical and unwise.