965 resultados para Alcohol-epidemiologic-survey
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Quitting tobacco or alcohol use has been reported to reduce the head and neck cancer risk in previous studies. However, it is unclear how many years must pass following cessation of these habits before the risk is reduced, and whether the risk ultimately declines to the level of never smokers or never drinkers. METHODS: We pooled individual-level data from case-control studies in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium. Data were available from 13 studies on drinking cessation (9167 cases and 12 593 controls), and from 17 studies on smoking cessation (12 040 cases and 16 884 controls). We estimated the effect of quitting smoking and drinking on the risk of head and neck cancer and its subsites, by calculating odds ratios (ORs) using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Quitting tobacco smoking for 1-4 years resulted in a head and neck cancer risk reduction [OR 0.70, confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.81 compared with current smoking], with the risk reduction due to smoking cessation after >/=20 years (OR 0.23, CI 0.18-0.31), reaching the level of never smokers. For alcohol use, a beneficial effect on the risk of head and neck cancer was only observed after >/=20 years of quitting (OR 0.60, CI 0.40-0.89 compared with current drinking), reaching the level of never drinkers. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support that cessation of tobacco smoking and cessation of alcohol drinking protect against the development of head and neck cancer.
Resumo:
Background: The prevalence of a low bone mineral density (T-score <-1 SD) in postmenopausal women with a fragility fracture may vary from 70% to less than 50%. In one study (Siris ES. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1108-12), the prevalence of osteoporosis was very low at 6.4%. The corresponding values in men are rarely reported. Methods: In a nationwide Swiss survey, all consecutive patients aged 50+ presenting with one or more fractures to the emergency ward, were recruited by 8 participating hospitals (University Hospitals: Basel, Bern, and Lausanne; cantonal hospitals: Fribourg, Luzern, and St Gallen; regional hospitals: Estavayer and Riaz) between 2004 and 2006. Diagnostic workup was collected for descriptive analysis. Results: 3667 consecutive patients with a fragility fracture, 2797 women (73.8 ± 11.6 years) and 870 men (70.0 ± 12.1 years), were included. DXA measurement was performed in 1152 (44%) patients. The mean of the lowest T-score values was -2.34 SD in women and -2.16 SD in men. In the 908 women, the prevalence of osteoporosis and osteopenia according to the fracture type was: sacrum (100%, 0%), rib (100%, 0%), thoracic vertebral (78%, 22%), femur trochanter (67%, 26%), pelvis (66%, 32%), lumbar vertebral (63%, 28%), femoral neck (53%, 34%), femur shaft (50%, 50%), proximal humerus (50%, 34%), distal forearm (41%, 45%), tibia proximal (41%, 31%), malleolar lateral (28%, 46%), malleolar median (13%, 47%). The corresponding percentages in the 244 men were: distal forearm (70%, 19%), rib (63%, 11%), pelvis (60%, 20%), malleolar median (60%, 32%), femur trochanter (48%, 31%), thoracic vertebral (47%, 53%), lumbar vertebral (43%, 36%), proximal humerus (40%, 43%), femoral neck (28%, 55%), tibia proximal (26%, 36%), malleolar lateral (18%, 56%). Conclusion: The probability of underlying osteoporosis or osteopenia in men and women aged 50+ who experienced a fragility fracture was beyond 75% in fractures of the sacrum, pelvis, spine, femur, proximal humerus and distal forearm. The medial and lateral malleolar fractures had the lowest predictive value in women, not in men.
Resumo:
To assess the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary evaluation and referral process in a prospective cohort of general hospital patients with alcohol dependence. Alcohol-dependent patients were identified in the wards of the general hospital and its primary care center. They were evaluated and then referred to treatment by a multidisciplinary team; those patients who accepted to participate in this cohort study were consecutively included and followed for 6 months. Not included patients were lost for follow-up, whereas all included patients were assessed at time of inclusion, 2 and 6 months later by a research psychologist in order to collect standardized baseline patients' characteristics, process salient features and patients outcomes (defined as treatment adherence and abstinence). Multidisciplinary evaluation and therapeutic referral was feasible and effective, with a success rate of 43%for treatment adherence and 28%for abstinence at 6 months. Among patients' characteristics, predictors of success were an age over 45, not living alone, being employed and being motivated to treatment (RAATE-A score < 18), whereas successful process characteristics included detoxification of the patient at time of referral and a full multidisciplinary referral meeting. This multidisciplinary model of evaluation and referral of alcohol dependent patients of a general hospital had a satisfactory level of effectiveness. Predictors of success and failure allow to identify subsets of patients for whom new strategies of motivation and treatment referral should be designed.
Resumo:
Quality assurance programmes are becoming a common practice in the field of mammography. At the present time several recommendations exist and different test objects are used to optimize this radiological procedure. The goal of this study was to check if geographically distant centres using different quality control procedures were comparable when using a common objective way of assessing image quality. The results show that consensus still needs to be found among radiologists to reach a satisfactory level of harmony between patient doses and image quality in Europe.
Resumo:
To create an instrument to be used in an outpatient clinic to detect adolescents prone to risk-taking behaviours. Based on previous research, five identified variables (relationship with parents and teachers, liking going to school, average grades, and level of religiosity) were used to create a screening tool to detect at least one of ten risky behaviours (tobacco, alcohol, cannabis and other illegal drugs use; sexual intercourse and sexual risky behaviour; driving while intoxicated, riding with an intoxicated driver, not always using a seat belt, and not always using a helmet). The instrument was tested using the Barcelona Adolescent Health Survey 1993. A Receiver Operating Characteristics curve was used to find the best cut-off point between high and low risk score. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to detect at least one risky behaviour and for each individual behaviour. In order to assess its predictive value, the analysis was repeated using the Barcelona Adolescent Health Survey 1999. In both cases, analyses were conducted for the whole sample and for younger and older adolescents. Adolescents with a high-risk score were more likely to take at least one risky behaviour both when the whole sample was analysed and by age groups. With very few exceptions, the Behaviour Evaluation for Risk-Taking Adolescents showed significant odds ratios for each individual variable. CONCLUSION: The Behaviour Evaluation for Risk-Taking Adolescents has shown its potential as an easy to use instrument to screen for risk-taking behaviours. Future research must aim towards assessing this instrument's predictive value in the clinical setting and it's application to other populations.