Motivational interviewing for maternal Immunizations: Intervention development

Background and ObjectiveVaccine uptake during pregnancy remains low. Our objectives were to describe 1) development and adaptation of a clinician communication training intervention for maternal immunizations and 2) obstetrics and gynecology (ob-gyn) clinician and staff perspectives on the intervention and fit for the prenatal care context.MethodsDesign of the Motivational Interviewing for Maternal Immunizations (MI4MI) intervention was based on similar communication training interventions for pediatric settings and included presumptive initiation of vaccine recommendations (“You’re due for two vaccines today”) combined with motivational interviewing (MI) for hesitant patients. Interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with ob-gyn clinicians and staff in five Colorado clinics including settings with obstetric physicians, certified nurse midwives (CNMs), and clinician-trainees. Participants were asked about adapting training to the ob-gyn setting and their implementation experiences. Feedback was incorporated through iterative changes to training components.ResultsInterview and focus group discussion results from participants before (n = 3), during (n = 11) and after (n = 25) implementation guided intervention development and adaptation. Three virtual, asynchronous training components were created: a video and two interactive modules. This virtual format was favored due to challenges attending group meetings; however, participants noted opportunities to practice skills through role-play were lacking. Training modules were adapted to include common challenging vaccine conversations and live-action videos. Participants liked interactive training components and use of adult learning strategies. Some participants initially resisted the presumptive approach but later found it useful after applying it in their practices. Overall, participants reported that MI4MI training fit well with the prenatal context and recommended more inclusion of non-clinician staff.ConclusionsMI4MI training was viewed as relevant and useful for ob-gyn clinicians and staff. Suggestions included making training more interactive, and including more complex scenarios and non-clinician staff.     

Survival analysis of crown margin repair: A retrospective study in a dental school setting

BackgroundRepairing crowns with defective margins is minimally invasive and cost-effective compared with replacement. The authors’ objectives were to examine the survival trajectory of crown margin repairs and to determine the factors associated with survival.MethodsRecords of adult patients from January 2008 through August 2019 were reviewed for crown margin repairs completed at University of Iowa College of Dentistry. A total of 1,002 crown margin repairs were found. Each repair was followed through the end of study in 2019 or until an event (for example, additional repair, endodontic treatment, crown replacement, or extraction). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to study the relationship between selected covariates and time to event.ResultsDuring the follow-up period, 32.8% of the repairs needed reintervention. In the final model, repair material was the only significant covariate. No difference was found between the survival of repairs done with resin-modified glass ionomer and amalgam. However, the repairs done with resin-based composite and conventional glass ionomer were more likely (1.5 times: 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.10 times; and 2 times: 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.73 times, respectively) to need reintervention than were those done with amalgam.ConclusionsMedian survival time of crown margin repairs was 5.1 years (95% CI, 4.48 to 5.72 years). Median survival times for amalgam, resin-modified glass ionomer, resin-based composite, and glass ionomer repair materials were 5.7 years (95% CI, 4.80 to 6.25 years), 5.3 years (95% CI, 4.73 to 6.34 years), 3.2 years (95% CI, 2.51 to 6.19 years), and 3.0 years (95% CI, 2.53 to 3.62 years), respectively.Practical ImplicationsWhen considering crown margin repairs, resin-modified glass ionomer or amalgam is preferable to resin-based composite or glass ionomer.     

基于苗药五藤膏外敷对CIA大鼠炎性骨破坏的影响探讨苗医外治就近驱邪的作用＊

目的 通过研究明确苗药五藤膏外敷缓解胶原诱导性关节炎（CIA）大鼠关节局部炎症和骨破坏的机制，证实苗医外治就近驱邪的作用。方法 将70只Wistar大鼠随机分为空白组、模型组、苗药五藤膏高、中、低剂量组、扶他林组及IL-17阻断组，每组10只。除空白组外，其余6组均构建CIA模型，并给予相应的外敷治疗。观察大鼠一般情况，HE染色进行病理学分析，TRAP染色检测OC生成，ELISA检测各炎症因子的含量，RT-PCR和WB分别检测RANKL的基因及蛋白表达。结果 苗药五藤膏能改善CIA大鼠破骨细胞浸润及关节病理性结构，并降低RANKL蛋白、基因表达以及TNF-α、IL-1、IL-6、IL-17含量。结论 苗药五藤膏外敷剂对CIA大鼠的治疗机制可能与降低致炎因子的分泌，抑制RANKL及OC的表达相关。     

藏药细叶亚菊的质量标准研究＊

目的 建立细叶亚菊的质量标准，为其质量控制和合理开发利用提供科学参考。方法 采用性状鉴别、显微鉴别、薄层色谱法（TLC）对细叶亚菊进行定性分析；参照《中国药典》（2020年版）通则方法对细叶亚菊水分、总灰分、酸不溶性灰分、水溶性浸出物进行含量检查；利用高效液相色谱法（HPLC）测定细叶亚菊中绿原酸、异绿原酸A的含量。结果 确定了细叶亚菊的药材性状及显微特征。TLC鉴别显示，供试品（细叶亚菊药材）与对照品（绿原酸、异绿原酸A）在相应位置上均显示相同颜色的荧光斑点。13批细叶亚菊水分、总灰分、酸不溶性灰分、浸出物的含量分别为8.55%-13.07%、6.81%-12.68%、1.11%-3.53%、8.41%-11.64%；绿原酸、异绿原酸A的含量范围分别为0.072%-0.440%、0.283%-1.324%（n=3）。结论 本研究建立的方法准确稳定，可为细叶亚菊的质量控制提供参考。暂规定细叶亚菊水分不得过12.0%，总灰分不得过10.0%，酸不溶性灰分不得过2.5%，水溶性浸出物不得少于8.0%，绿原酸不得少于0.2%，异绿原酸A不得少于0.6%。     

多元化联合教学模式在超声引导下疼痛介入治疗中的应用

目的探讨多元化联合教学模式在超声引导下疼痛介入治疗教学中的应用效果。方法选择2018年1月至2020年12月在北京大学第三医院疼痛科进修的30名医师作为研究对象,将其分为对照组与观察组;对照组采用常规教学模式;观察组采用多元化联合教学模式,比较两组医师技能考核成绩、教学质量评分和满意度评分。结果观察组医师技能考核成绩优良率为93.3%,高于对照组的73.3%(P<0.05);观察组医师对基础理论知识掌握、临床思维能力的提高、学习兴趣的激发、疾病诊治能力的提高4个方面的评分均高于对照组(P<0.01)。结论多元化联合教学模式可促进超声引导下疼痛介入治疗技能的提高,有利于提高学员的综合临床能力。     

Process evaluation of implementation strategies to reduce potentially inappropriate medication prescribing in older population: A scoping review

ObjectivesSeveral implementation strategies can reduce potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) prescribing. Although use of PIMs has declined in recent years, it remains prevalent. Various strategies exist to improve the appropriateness of medication use. However, little is known about the processes of these different implementation strategies. This scoping review aims to investigate how the process evaluation of implementation strategies for reducing PIM prescribing in the older population has been studied.MethodsWe searched for process evaluations of implementation strategies for reducing PIM prescribing in PUBMED, SCOPUS and Web of Science published between January 2000 and November 2019 in English. We applied the following inclusion criteria: patients aged ≥65 years, validated PIM criteria, and implementation process evaluated. The review focuses on decision support for health care professionals. We described the findings of the process evaluations, and compared the authors’ concepts of process evaluation of the included publications to those of Proctor et al.( 2010).ResultOf 9131 publications screened, 29 met our inclusion criteria. Different process evaluation conceptualizations were identified. Most process evaluations took place in the initial stages of the process (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, and feasibility) and sustainability and implementation costs were seldom evaluated. None of the included publications evaluated fidelity.Multifaceted interventions were the most studied implementation strategies. Medication review was more common in acceptability evaluations, multidisciplinary interventions in adoption evaluations, and computerized systems and educational interventions in feasibility evaluations. Process evaluations were studied from the health care professionals’ viewpoint in most of the included publications, but the management viewpoint was missing.DiscussionThe conceptualization of process evaluation in the field of PIM prescribing is indeterminate. There is also a current gap in the knowledge of sustainability and implementation costs. Clarifying the conceptualization of implementation process evaluation is essential in order to effectively translate research knowledge into practice.