Retrograde inspection vs standard forward view for the detection of colorectal adenomas during colonoscopy: A back-to-back randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND The adenoma detection rate(ADR) is inversely associated with the incidence of interval colorectal cancer and serves as a benchmark quality criterion during screening colonoscopy. However, adenoma miss rates reach up to 26% and studies have shown that a second inspection of the right colon in retroflected view(RFV) can increase ADR.AIM To assess whether inspection of the whole colon in RFV compared to standard forward view(SFV) can increase ADR.METHODS Patients presenting for screening or surveillance colonoscopy were invited to participate in this randomized controlled trial and randomized into two arms. In RFV arm colonoscopy was initially performed with SFV, followed by a second inspection of the whole colon in RFV. In the SFV arm first withdrawal was performed with SFV, followed by a second inspection of the whole colon again with SFV. Number, size and morphology of polyps found during first and second inspection in each colonic segment were recorded and all polyps were removed and sent for histopathology in separate containers.RESULTS Two hundred and five patients were randomly assigned to the RFV(n = 101) and SFV(n = 104) arm. In the RFV arm, both polyp detection rate(PDR) and ADR were increased under second inspection in RFV(PDR 1~(st) SFV: 39.8%, PDR 2~(nd)RFV: 46.6%; ADR 1~(st) SFV: 35.2%, ADR 2~(nd) RFV: 42%). Likewise, in the SFV arm,PDR and ADR were increased under second inspection(PDR 1~(st) SFV: 37.5%, PDR 2~(nd) SFV: 46.6%; ADR 1~(st) SFV: 34.1%, ADR 2~(nd)SFV: 44.3%) with no significant differences in ADR and PDR between the SFV and RFV arm. Mean number of adenomas per patient(APP) was increased in the RFV and SFV(APP RFV arm: 1~(st) SFV: 1.71; 2~(nd) RFV: 2.38; APP SFV arm: 1~(st) SFV: 1.83, 2~(nd)SFV:2.2). The majority of adenomas additionally found during second inspection in RFV or in SFV were located in the transverse and left-sided colon and were 5 mm in size.CONCLUSION Second inspection of the whole colon leads to increased adenoma detection with no differences between SFV and RFV. Hence, increased detection is most likely a feature of the second inspection itself but not of the inspection mode.     

某高校新生体检结果分析

目的 分析某高校入学新生的体检结果,为制定健康管理措施提供依据。方法 开展某高校入学新生体检(内科、外科、五官科、实验室检查),对血压、肝功与血脂、体质指数、视力、脊柱侧弯等结果进行分析。结果 共调查男生357人,女生641人。高血压患病率1.80%(男2.24%、女1.56%),血脂升高率14.83%(男15.97%、女14.20%),转氨酶升高率4.81%(男8.12%、女2.96%),超重率17.64%(男24.93%、女13.97%),肥胖率7.62%(男12.32%、女4.99%),视力不良率79.36%(男73.67%、女82.53%),脊柱侧弯率1.60%(男1.12%、女1.87%)。不同性别的体质量组构成、血压分型构成、视力不良率差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);不同体质量组的收缩压升高率、血脂升高率、转氨酶升高率、脊柱侧弯率差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);超重和肥胖组的收缩压升高率、血脂升高率高于其他组;肥胖组的转氨酶升高率高于其他组;轻体质量组的脊柱侧弯率高于其他组。结论 大学新生的视力不良率和非正常体质量率较高,高血压、血脂异常、肝功异常、脊柱侧弯检出率较低,女生的健康状况优于男生。应重视大学生的健康状况,制定综合干预措施,做好学生健康管理工作。     

学龄期近视进展儿童调节功能的客观检查和分析

目的　对学龄期近视进展儿童进行调节功能的客观检查与分析，观察调节功能与近视进展之间的相关性。方法　选取2017年至2018年在首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院视光学门诊定期就诊的71名学龄期儿童为研究对象，根据受试者近年的屈光度进展速度，按≤0.50 D·a^-1、>0.50~1.00 D·a^-1、>1.00~1.50 D·a^-1、>1.50 D·a^-1分为4组，使用人眼调节分析仪对受试者进行调节功能的客观测量与分析，记录不同调节刺激视标下4组的客观调节反应值和客观调节微波动值，并作对比。结果　在所有调节视标上，各组随着调节刺激幅度增加，客观调节反应值也逐渐增加，4组在不同调节刺激视标下的客观调节反应值及平均的客观调节反应值差异均无统计学意义（均为P＞0.05）。≤0.50 D·a^-1、>0.50~1.00 D·a^-1、>1.00~1.50 D·a^-1、>1.50 D·a^-1近视进展速度组调节微波动值分别为（62.2±5.6）D、（62.5±5.3）D、（66.5±6.0）D和（58.0±6.5）D，4组间差异有统计学意义（F=6.424，P=0.001），在+0.50~-0.50 D、-2.00 D调节刺激视标下，4组的客观调节微波动值比较差异均有统计学意义（均为P＜0.05），在其余调节刺激视标下差异均无统计学意义（均为P＞0.05）。结论　对于学龄期儿童的近视进展速度，客观调节微波动值相对于客观调节反应值可能是一个更为敏感的相关指标。     

国内外护理学本科生毕业考核现状与分析

教育测量与评价对实现教育目标具有重要作用。科学的教育评价既促进学生学习,又为教育决策提供依据,以实现持续质量改进。"健康中国2030"的整体目标、医学科学的发展及人民的健康需求,对新时代护理人才的培养提出了更高、更具体的要求。高等护理院校应以国家和社会对护理人才需求、院校培养目标为导向,以测量理论为基础,制定完善的学业评定标准,科学地开展毕业考核,保证人才"出口"质量。毕业考核作为终结性评价,测试内容在评价质量中起核心作用,应符合国家护理学专业培养标准,并与院校培养目标、课程目标契合。院校应关注护理本科生毕业考核质量,在保障测试信度的同时,做到实施公平、评价适当、标准一致,以确保测试的效度。教育管理部门及各院校应优化评价体系,加强对护理本科生毕业管理,在充分开展系统调查与分析的基础上,基于胜任力导向和结果导向,建立综合性评价体系,在教学过程中进行全方位反馈评价管理。文章结合国内外护理学专业本科生毕业考核的现状,从考核目的、内容、方式、评价主体、质量控制等方面进行综述与分析,为我国加强护理学本科教育,完善护理学专业本科生毕业评价体系建设提供借鉴。     

Tester and testing procedure influence clinically determined gait speed

BackgroundThere is a clinical need to be able to reliably detect meaningful changes (0.1 to 0.2 m/s) in usual gait speed (UGS) considering reduced gait speed is associated with morbidity and mortality.Research questionWhat is the impact of tester on UGS assessment, and the influence of test repetition (trial 1 vs. 2), timing method (manual stopwatch vs. automated timing), and starting condition (stationary vs. dynamic start) on the ability to detect changes in UGS and fast gait speed (FGS)?MethodsUGS and FGS was assessed in 725 participants on a 8-m course with infrared timing gates positioned at 0, 2, 4 and 6 m. Testing was performed by one of 13 testers trained by a single researcher. Time to walk 4-m from a stationary start (i.e. from 0-m to 4-m) was measured manually using a stopwatch and automatically via the timing gates at 0-m and 4-m. Time taken to walk 4-m with a dynamic start was measured during the same trial by recording the time to walk between the timing gates at 2-m and 6-m (i.e. after 2-m acceleration).ResultsTesters differed for UGS measured using manual vs. automated timing (p = 0.02), with five and two testers recording slower and faster UGS using manual timing, respectively. 95% limits of agreement for trial 1 vs. 2, manual vs. automated timing, and dynamic vs. stationary start ranged from ±0.15 m/s to ±0.20 m/s, coinciding with the range for a clinically meaningful change. Limits of agreement for FGS were larger ranging from ±0.26 m/s to ±0.35 m/s.SignificanceRepeat testing of UGS should performed by the same tester or using an automated timing method to control for tester effects. Test protocol should remain constant both between and within participants as protocol deviations may result in detection of an artificial clinically meaningful change.     

国医大师段富津教授验案四则浅析

本文选取国医大师段富津教授上世纪九十年代书写的典型验案四则,对疾病病机及方药配伍进行浅析。