Notes
Notes - notes.io |
3 ± 0.3/minutes vs 6.1 ± 0.4/minutes, P < 0.001).
The single rescuer ELCC method is an effective alternative to the SCC method for pediatric CPR because the ELCC method can prevent elbow flexion.Trial registration Our research is simulation manikin study. So we do not need to "trial registration".
The single rescuer ELCC method is an effective alternative to the SCC method for pediatric CPR because the ELCC method can prevent elbow flexion.Trial registration Our research is simulation manikin study. So we do not need to "trial registration".
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a dramatic increase in virtual care (VC) across outpatient specialties, but little is known regarding provider acceptance of VC.
The objective of this study was to assess provider perceptions of the quality, efficiency, and challenges of VC versus in-person care with masks.
This was a voluntary survey.
Mental health (MH), primary care, medical specialty, and surgical specialty providers across the 8 VA New England Healthcare System medical centers.
Provider ratings of (1) quality and efficiency of VC (phone and video telehealth) compared with in-person care with masks; (2) challenges of VC; and (3) percentage of patients that providers are comfortable seeing via VC in the future.
The sample included 998 respondents (49.8% MH, 20.6% primary care, 20.4% medical specialty, 9.1% surgical specialty; 61% response rate). Most providers rated VC as equivalent to or higher in quality and efficiency compared with in-person care with masks. Quality ratings were significantly higher for video versus phone (χ2=61.4, P<0.0001), but efficiency ratings did not differ significantly. Ratings varied across specialties (highest in MH, lowest in SS; all χ2s>24.1, Ps<0.001). Inability to conduct a physical examination and patient technical difficulties were significant challenges. MH providers were comfortable seeing a larger proportion of patients virtually compared with the other specialties (all χ2s>12.2, Ps<0.01).
Broad provider support for VC was stratified across specialties, with the highest ratings in MH and lowest ratings in SS. Findings will inform the improvement of VC processes and the planning of health care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.
Broad provider support for VC was stratified across specialties, with the highest ratings in MH and lowest ratings in SS. Findings will inform the improvement of VC processes and the planning of health care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.
Redman, KJ, Connick, MJ, Beckman, EM, and Kelly, VG. Monitoring prescribed and actual resistance training loads in professional rugby league. J Strength Cond Res 35(6) 1604-1610, 2021-Coaches devote a considerable amount of time and effort prescribing and selecting exercises to elicit training adaptations. Adherence to the prescribed resistance training load may vary for a number of reasons. The aim of this study was to quantify the difference between prescribed and actual resistance training loads in a team of professional rugby league players. Training loads were quantified using volume load and training intensity throughout a season. The competition was categorized into preseason, early competition, mid-competition, and late competition. Twenty-seven players participated in this study. click here Four exercises were monitored back squat, bench press, bench pull, and clean pull. A Friedman's test was used to assess differences between prescribed and actual training loads throughout different phases of the season, foompetition in comparison to all other phases of the season (p less then 0.01). Although players adherence to prescribed training intensity was significantly greater during the preseason compared with the remainder of the season (p less then 0.05), they completed significantly less prescribed training load during week 1 in comparison to week 4 within a training block (p less then 0.05). The results of this study demonstrate that regular monitoring of completed resistance training loads may be of greater importance to strength and conditioning coaches to assist in examining potential progress and fatigue or allow for more accurate prescription of load to enhance adaptation throughout a season.
This study aimed to measure the frequency and severity of avoidable adverse events (AAEs) related to ignoring do-not-do recommendations (DNDs) in primary care.
A retrospective cohort study analyzing the frequency and severity of AAEs related to ignoring DNDs (7 from family medicine and 3 from pediatrics) was conducted in Spain. Data were randomly extracted from computerized electronic medical records by a total of 20 general practitioners and 5 pediatricians acting as reviewers; data between February 2018 and September 2019 were analyzed.
A total of 2557 records of adult and pediatric patients were reviewed. There were 1859 (72.7%) of 2557 (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.0%-74.4%) DNDs actions in 1307 patients (1507 were performed by general practitioners and 352 by pediatricians). Do-not-do recommendations were ignored more often in female patients (P < 0.0001). Sixty-nine AAEs were linked to ignoring DNDs (69/1307 [5.3%]; 95% CI, 4.1%-6.5%). Of those, 54 (5.1%) of 1062 were in adult patients (95% CI, 3.8%-6.4%) and 15 (6.1%) of 245 in pediatric patients (95% CI, 3.1%-9.1%). In adult patients, the majority of AAEs (51/901 [5.7%]; 95% CI, 4.2%-7.2%) occurred in patients 65 years or older. Most AAEs were characterized by temporary minor harm both in adult patients (28/54 [51.9%]; 95% CI, 38.5%-65.2%) and pediatric patients (15/15 [100%]).
These findings provide a new perspective about the consequences of low-value practices for the patients and the health care systems. Ignoring DNDs could place patients at risk, and their safety might be unnecessarily compromised.
NCT03482232.
NCT03482232.
The aim of the study was to assess the implementation of medication reconciliation (MedRec) and medication-related costs in dialysis-dependent patients.
Completed best possible medication history and reconciliation forms were collected within 6 months from 77 patients' file at the dialysis center. Outcome measures were number and types of medication discrepancies, medication-related problems (MRPs), and their potential to cause harm, in addition to the type and number of interventions conducted during MedRec and the resulted medication costs reduction.
The mean number of medications was 11 ± 4, which was reduced to 8 ± 3 (P < 0.0001) after MedRec. Medication discrepancies accounted for 55, and MRPs were raised by pharmacists 216 times, and 55% had the potential to cause moderate patient discomfort. Mediations were held in 1.2%, discontinued in 21.2%, and changed in 5.4%, which led to €75.665 (U.S. $85.33) and €459.93 (U.S. $511.979) reduction in medication costs per patient for 1 and 6 months, respectively.
Homepage: https://www.selleckchem.com/
|
Notes.io is a web-based application for taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000 notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 12 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team