Depression and anxiety in pain clinic patients, Rapid assessment by microcomputer

Computer administered depression and anxiety rating scales were used in a pilot study to screen patients attending a regional pain relief unit. Patients found the procedure acceptable and helpful. There was a poor correlation between the computer assessments and doctors' ratings, with in general a much greater degree of morbid depression and anxiety revealed by the computer. Computer administered rating scales may be useful as a screening tool in pain clinic patients to identify those at risk of significant psychiatric morbidity.     

A computer-assisted three-dimensional treatment planning system

The three-dimensional treatment planning system developed at the Rhode Island Hospital visualizes the spatial interrelationships of the radiation beam, the tumor, and the adjacent organs within the patient. It is possible to rotate and vary the scale of the display to better comprehend the extent of these structures. By viewing the display as if from along the radiation beam, one can design shaped treatment fields which best suit the three-dimensional nature of the disease. With this system, it is possible to reduce the volume of normal tissue which would typically be irradiated if two-dimensional treatment planning techniques and assumptions were employed.     

Evaluation of photoscreener instruments in a childhood population: 1. Otago photoscreener and Dortmans videophotorefractor

Objective: To evaluate two photoscreeners in a childhood population.
Study design: Double-masked study.
Subjects and method: One hundred and thirteen children aged between 11 and 44 months with either normal vision or known visual disorders were photoscreened without cycloplegia by the Otago and Dortmans (prototype) photoscreeners. Each child had a full ophthalmological examination either on the day of screening or in the preceeding six months. Photoscreen images were reviewed by an independent observer for indicators of amblyopiogenic risk factors, and compared to the full ophthalmological examination to determine sensitivity and specificity for each instrument.
Results: The Otago photoscreener returned a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 82% for the detection of amblyopiogenic risk factors. The Dortmans photoscreener returned a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 90%. Both photoscreeners were portable and easily operated. Conclusion: Children can be screened successfully for amblyopiogenic risk factors with these photoscreening systems. Further evaluation is required to determine specificity in a normal population. This would also provide information on the potential usefulness of photoscreeners in a cost effective childhood vision screening program.