Update on intrapartum fetal pulse oximetry

This article examines the current status of fetal pulse oximetry (FPO) as a means of intrapartum assessment of fetal wellbeing. FPO has been developed to a stage where it is a safe and accurate indicator of intrapartum fetal oxygenation. In general, sliding the FPO sensor along the examiner's fingers and through the cervix, to lie alongside the fetal cheek or temple is easy The recent publication of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of FPO versus conventional intrapartum monitoring has validated its use to reduce caesarean section rates for nonreassuring fetal status. An Australian multicentre RCT is currently underway. Maternal satisfaction rates with FPO are high. FPO may be used during labour when the electronic fetal heart rate trace is nonreassuring or when conventional monitoring is unreliable, such as with fetal arrhythmias. If the fetal oxygen saturation (FSpO(2)) values are < 30%, prompt obstetric intervention is indicated, such as fetal scalp blood sampling or delivery FSpO(2) monitoring should not form the sole basis of intrapartum fetal welfare assessment. Rather, the whole clinical picture should be considered.

Child welfare workers' use of theory in working with physical child abuse: Implications for professional supervision

This article examines child welfare workers' understanding of physical child abuse and the Implications for those supervising these workers. The article Is based on the results of a study that involved In-depth Interviews and focus groups with statutory child welfare workers. Analysis revealed that workers' understanding of physical child abuse embodied a wide range of ideas that were generally consistent with existing literature. The study highlights the value and utility of a reflective approach In stimulating and making explicit the theoretical underpinnings of child welfare workers practice. Specific Implications for professional supervision are addressed.

Guidelines for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis for general practitioners

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis Australia has been committed to the education of general practitioners and the community with a series of updated guidelines on the management of osteoporosis. Since the last series was published in Australian Family Physician (August 2000), there have been further advances in our understanding of the treatments involved in both prevention of bone loss and the management of established osteoporosis. OBJECTIVE: This article represents updated guidelines for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis to assist GPs identify those women at risk and to review current treatment strategies. DISCUSSION: Osteoporosis and its associated problems are major health concerns in Australia, especially with an aging population. While important principles of management are still considered to be maximising peak bone mass and preventing postmenopausal bone loss, new clinical trial data about drugs such as the bisphosphonates, raloxifene and oestrogen have recently become available and the relative role of various agents is gradually becoming clearer. The use of long term hormone replacement therapy has mixed risks and benefits that requires individual patient counselling.

A clinical audit of the prescribing of celecoxib and rofecoxib in Australian rural general practice

Aims The new cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) selective inhibitors, celecoxib (Celebrex®) and rofecoxib (Vioxx®), have been widely prescribed since their launch. No reviews currently appear in the literature of prescribing patterns in Australia. This paper describes a self-audit of the clinical use of selective COX-2 inhibitor therapy undertaken with rural general practitioners (GPs) in Australia. Methods A structured audit form was developed and distributed to interested GPs. The form was self-administered and focused on issues about COX-2 inhibitors and the types of patients who were receiving them, e.g. indications, patient demographics, risk factors and drug interactions. Results A total of 627 patients were recruited (569 celecoxib and 58 rofecoxib). A range of doses was prescribed. Osteoarthritis was the most common indication (68.1%). Risk factors known for the nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were identified in 65.1% of patients, with the most common being advanced age, hypertension and previous peptic ulcer disease. Potential drug interactions were common. A variety of reasons for initiation of therapy was identified; these included perceived increased efficacy, safety and failure of other treatment. Conclusions These results show that COX-2 inhibitors are being prescribed for patients with multiple risk factors that may place the patient at increased risk of adverse drug reactions to a COX-2 inhibitor. The perception of improved safety and efficacy was common and is of concern. Limitations of the study include the reliance on self-reporting.

In the aftermath of welfare 'reform'

The impact of the implementation of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 is making itself felt across the US. Welfare roles are down dramatically, and public officials hail a new day of personal responsibility, but the popular press and ethnographic accounts increasingly challenge that interpretation, pointing to staggering human costs among those who are standing in the ideological crossfire.

Attitudes and practices of general practitioners in the diagnosis and management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Objective: To assess understanding of, and actual and potential roles in management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among GPs. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of Queensland GPs selected randomly from the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners directory of members was carried out. Main outcome measures were knowledge levels of ADHD, current management practices, referral patterns and self-perceived information and training needs. Results: Three hundred and ninety-nine GPs returned a completed questionnaire (response rate 76%). Roles identified by GPs were: the provisional diagnosis of ADHD and referral to specialist services for confirmation of the diagnosis and initiation of management; assistance with monitoring progress once a management plan was in place; education of the child and their family regarding the disorder; and liaison with the school where necessary. Perceived barriers to increased involvement of GPs were: time and resource constraints of general practice; concerns regarding abuse and addiction liability of prescription stimulants; complex diagnostic issues associated with childhood behavioural problems; and lack of training and education regarding ADHD. Conclusions: General practitioners identify a role for themselves in ADHD care that is largely supportive in nature and involves close liaison with specialist services.