Components of resistance to Fusarium head blight in wheat detected in a seed germination assay with Microdochium majus and the relationship to FHB disease development and mycotoxin accumulation from Fusarium graminearum infection.

Components of partial disease resistance (PDR) to fusarium head blight (FHB), detected in a seed-germination assay, were compared with whole-plant FHB resistance of 30 USA soft red winter wheat entries in the 2002 Uniform Southern FHB Nursery. Highly significant (P <0·001) differences between cultivars in the in vitro seed-germination assay inoculated with Microdochium majus were correlated to FHB disease incidence (r = -0·41; P <0·05), severity (r = -0·47; P <0·01), FHB index (r = -0·46; P <0·01), damaged kernels (r = -0·52; P <0·01), grain deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration (r = -0·40; P <0·05) and incidence/severity/kernel-damage index (ISK) (r = -0·45; P <0·01) caused by Fusarium graminearum. Multiple linear regression analysis explained a greater percentage of variation in FHB resistance using the seed-germination assay and the previously reported detached-leaf assay PDR components as explanatory factors. Shorter incubation periods, longer latent periods, shorter lesion lengths in the detached-leaf assay and higher germination rates in the seed-germination assay were related to greater FHB resistance across all disease variables, collectively explaining 62% of variation for incidence, 49% for severity, 56% for F. graminearum-damaged kernels (FDK), 39% for DON and 59% for ISK index. Incubation period was most strongly related to disease incidence and the early stages of infection, while resistance detected in the seed germination assay and latent period were more strongly related to FHB disease severity. Resistance detected using the seed-germination assay was notable as it related to greater decline in the level of FDK and a smaller reduction in DON than would have been expected from the reduction in FHB disease assessed by visual symptoms.

Improving the quality of life for patients with angina pectoris: a team approach to disease management.

The evaluation of outcome of management of angina patients is now inextricably linked with an assessment of quality of life. Angina, as a manifestation of coronary heart disease, is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in many countries. Optimal management of patients with angina is of undeniable national and global significance.

This paper attempts to indicate the importance of a team approach and the implications for patients’ quality of life of involving professionals with a variety of different skills. It outlines current guidelines for the management of angina, including aspects of diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation. Factors of relevance to the management of patients as individuals are discussed. The association of improved quality of life and reduced severity of symptoms with benefit for both the individual and society is considered.

Development of a Complex Intervention for Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Primary Care Using the UK Medical Research Council Framework

Objective: To apply the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for development and evaluation of trials of complex interventions to a primary healthcare intervention to promote secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Study Design: Case report of intervention development. Methods: First, literature relating to secondary prevention and lifestyle change was reviewed. Second, a preliminary intervention was modeled, based on literature findings and focus group interviews with patients (n = 23) and staff (n = 29) from 4 general practices. Participants’ experiences of and attitudes toward key intervention components were explored. Third, the preliminary intervention was pilot-tested in 4 general practices. After delivery of the pilot intervention, practitioners evaluated the training sessions, and qualitative data relating to experiences of the intervention were collected using semistructured interviews with staff (n = 10) and patient focus groups (n = 17). Results: Literature review identified 3 intervention components: a structured recall system, practitioner training, and patient information. Initial qualitative data identified variations in recall system design, training requirements (medication prescribing, facilitating behavior change), and information appropriate to the prospective study participants. Identifying detailed structures within intervention components clarified how the intervention could be tailored to individual practice, practitioner, and patient needs while preserving the theoretical functions of the components. Findings from the pilot phase informed further modeling of the intervention, reducing administrative time, increasing practical content of training, and omitting unhelpful patient information. Conclusion: Application of the MRC framework helped to determine the feasibility and development of a complex intervention for primary care research.