医院信息化平台住院陪护人员管理功能的开发与应用

目的 探讨医院信息系统中增加住院陪护管理功能的应用效果。方法 基于互联网医院、智慧医院等信息系统，开发信息化住院陪护管理功能，包括流行病学史调查、免费核酸申请、电子陪护证办理、体温监测登记及上报和统计查询。该功能与医院智慧护理链接后全院应用。比较功能应用前和应用后的遵医嘱一患一陪达标率、有效陪护证达标率、体温监测并登记日上报达标率和陪护证使用追溯率，评价护士和管理者疫情防控管理的人均耗时以及对该管理功能的满意度。结果 应用信息化陪护管理功能后，一患一陪达标率、有效陪护证达标率、体温监测并登记日上报达标率和陪护证使用追溯率显著高于应用前（均P＜0.05）；护士陪护管理人均耗时从（554.13±30.77）s降至（311.67±21.54）s（P＜0.05）；护士和管理者对该信息化陪护管理功能的满意度显著提高（均P＜0.05）。结论 信息化住院陪护管理功能的应用有效提升了疫情期间陪护的管理质量和管理效率，提高了一线护士和管理者的满意度。     

WHO working group meeting to amend WHO Recommendations to assure the quality,safety and efficacy of live attenuated yellow fever vaccines

The current WHO Recommendations to assure the quality, safety and efficacy of live attenuated yellow fever vaccines were adopted in 2010. This document recommends that vaccine virus master and working seed lots should be tested for viscerotropism, immunogenicity and neurovirulence in monkeys. A vaccine manufacturer has reported, recently, discrepancies on the clinical scoring of monkeys during assessment of working seed lots and suggested aligning neurotropism assessment of yellow fever vaccines virus seed lots with that of neurovirulence testing of polio vaccines virus seed lots. In this approach, clinical signs are recorded but do not form part of the assessment or pass/fail criteria. At its 71^st meeting in August 2020, the ECBS agreed to establish a drafting group and to consult with manufacturers and other stakeholders on the proposed amendment. Then a survey had been conducted to seek opinions of stakeholders on the neurotropism testing and revision of current WHO Recommendations for yellow fever vaccines. It was recognized from the answers of the survey that the test for neurovirulence in monkeys presents several technical challenges which could be addressed in the amended version of the Recommendations.On 18–19 March 2021, a virtual WHO working group meeting was held to discuss a proposed draft of the amended text with participants of yellow fever vaccine manufacturers and relevant regulators. Overall, there was a consensus among manufacturers and regulators that clinical evaluation provides important information and should be retained as part of the neurotropism test. However, there was also agreement that the test is somewhat subjective, and that analysis can be difficult. It was recognized that there was potential for improvement in both test execution and analysis to increase harmonization between manufacturers. Alternative tests to the non-human primates neurovirulence test would be useful but it was agreed that none seem to be sufficiently developed at present. Based on these working group discussions, it was proposed that the appendix on neurotropism test to be further revised by the WHO drafting group and submitted to ECBS for review and adoption.Issues other than neurotropism test were discussed in the meeting as well. There were a number of points identified during the meeting, such as new platform of production, animal models, deep sequencing, international standards, that are outside the current recommendations that are worthy of further discussion. Therefore, it is recommended that there would be a future meeting with various stakeholders to discuss the potential revision of the whole Recommendations for yellow fever vaccines in order to meet the current needs.     

外伤牙活力判定的方法及意义

牙外伤是口腔急诊常见的病症之一，及时准确的牙髓活力判断是正确治疗以利维持美学与功能的重要前提条件。文章通过对牙髓活力的生物学基础、牙髓活力测验方法及评价、外伤牙髓受损类型和牙髓活力特点分析，在国际牙外伤临床治疗指南的方向指导下，结合案例和经验，概括外伤牙活力与实施临床治疗方案的关系，为提高牙外伤的临床诊治思维、科学精准和个性化治疗设计提供支持，具有重要的应用价值。     

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PurposeUnderstanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.ResultsAcross the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.ConclusionWe describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.