Ultrasonography in the detection of cervical incompetency

In 80 pregnancies with clinical and ultrasonic signs of cervical incompetency, the length of the cervix and the thickness of the anterior wall of a lower uterine segment have been evaluated ultrasonically. We have also measured the width of the endocervical canal and studied the prolapse of fetal membranes (with fetal parts) into the endocervical canal. We evaluated these same parameters in 80 healthy pregnancies. The length of the cervix, the thickness of the anterior wall of a lower uterine segment, and the width of the endocervical canal were followed longitudinally in the patients from the 10th to the 36th gestation week. No statistically significant differences between age groups were found. In four age groups at risk for cervical incompetency, cervical lengths and wall thickness were significantly different (p less than 0.001) from those in comparable controls. Forty-five percent of the patients in the at-risk group, with cervical cerclage, delivered at 37.3 (range: 32 to 41) weeks and 6.25% of pregnancies ended in abortion when the amniotic membrane herniated into the cervical canal, with or without some part of the fetus.     

Methylcholanthrenkrebs der Brust bei weißen Mäusen

Ohne ZusammenfassungMit 2 Textabbildungen.     

Enhancing Stewardship of Community-Engaged Research Through Governance

Objectives. We explored the relationship of community-engaged research final approval type (tribal government, health board, or public health office (TG/HB); agency staff or advisory board; or individual or no community approval) with governance processes, productivity, and perceived outcomes.Methods. We identified 294 federally funded community-engaged research projects in 2009 from the National Institutes of Health’s Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Prevention Research Centers, and Native American Research Centers for Health databases. Two hundred (68.0%) investigators completed a survey about governance processes and productivity measures; 312 partners (77.2% of 404 invited) and 138 investigators (69.0% of 200 invited) completed a survey about perceived outcomes.Results. Projects with TG/HB approval had increased likelihood of community control of resources (odds ratios [ORs] ≥ 4.80). Projects with other approvals had decreased likelihood of development or revision of institutional review board policies (ORs ≤ 0.37), having written agreements (ORs ≤ 0.17), and agreements about publishing (ORs ≤ 0.28), data use (ORs ≤ 0.17), and publishing approval (ORs ≤ 0.14).Conclusions. Community-engaged research projects with TG/HB approval had strong stewardship of project resources and agreements. Governance as stewardship protects community interests; thus, is an ethical imperative for communities, especially native communities, to adopt.Researchers working with native communities (American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian peoples), other racial/ethnic minority communities, or other communities facing disparities that experience similar mistrust for past research issues, health inequities (e.g., gays and lesbians or people with disabilities), or both, have advocated the use of participatory research to enhance community health.1–6 Such approaches include tribal participatory research, community-based participatory research, and participatory action research and are generally grouped as community-engaged research (CEnR). There is a continuum of engagement,7 but CEnR that involves collaborative partnership and shared leadership between community members and (academic) researchers in all phases of the research can build capacity of all partners, create research that benefits the community, and enhance translation of research findings to the community.8–13 These approaches have attraction because they can advance cocreation of the research, contribute culturally centered methods, and foster research capacity.1,2,14,15Although CEnR approaches have appeal, they still require governance to provide protection, oversight, guidance, legitimacy, and community benefit. Governance over CEnR is complex and involves numerous practices and policies.16,17 Historically, oversight responsibilities have been held by institutional review boards (IRBs) that uphold federal standards established by the Office for Human Research Protections.18,19 Use of IRBs (e.g., university IRBs or Indian Health Service IRBs) for research oversight characterizes governance as regulation as the focus is on balancing the needs of protection of individuals from harm while trying to foster scientific innovation. However, when research partners consider other functions of governance alongside legal regulation (e.g., use of tribal governments or community-based review boards), the quality of research can be strengthened and more attention paid to the benefits and harm of the research for the community.20–22In recent years, policymakers, CEnR researchers, and community organizations have advocated a broader perspective of governance, one that can be characterized as stewardship of research. Governance as stewardship enhances protection of the community, helps to foster research partnerships and appropriate access to and approval of research by community bodies, ensures benefit for the community, provides legitimacy of the research, shares responsibility for the research, provides community control, and builds research capacity in communities.20–23 For example, when native communities steward research, new patterns emerge between academic and community partners that might involve (1) community and academic partners requiring and committing to oversight by a tribal council or community board, (2) review boards or tribal governments insisting the that project demonstrate benefits to the community (not just individuals), (3) all partners committing to tribal ownership of the data, and (4) all partners working to use data and disseminate findings following tribal review.2,24–27Although nontribal communities do not have a tribal council for formal governance, they establish various governance mechanisms such as oversight by faith-based networks or leaders, health boards or public health offices, project advisory boards, or community partner boards.21,28–30 Stewardship by these governing entities may involve (1) academic partners that engage in collaboration with the community to produce the research, (2) projects that use culturally relevant research designs and instruments to enhance the quality of the research, (3) projects that hire community members on research projects to build research capacity, and (4) academic partners that encourage community engagement and participation.2–4,21,28 In both native and nonnative communities, stewardship practices lead to enhanced trust of the research process by community partners, relationships that balance community and academic institutional power, IRB processes that reflect community interests and not just biomedical interests, inclusion of cultural frameworks that fit the community, and academic members committed to community engagement.21,28,31Enhancing stewardship of research through governance has focused on several activities. First, increasingly, native and nonnative communities are asserting their roles in overseeing research by developing community IRBs and other forms of research oversight.23,32,33 Second, research review can protect community knowledge by establishing protocols for oversight and can affirm tribal or community authority to approve and guide research that will benefit the community.21,22,28–30,33,34 Third, the National Congress of American Indians35–37 asserts that tribes, as sovereign nations, have regulatory authority over research that takes place on tribal lands and with tribal citizens. Several tribes have exercised governance by establishing research codes, research review boards, and formal agreements with research institutions, and some intertribal entities have established research oversight in urban and cross-tribal regions.33,38Despite the expanded view of ethical issues within CEnR projects and an upsurge in community governance expectations from communities and some funders, there has been little research that has examined the role of governance in research specifically, as well as concerns that these processes might inhibit research. Some researchers and policy analysts suggest that tribal research review is perceived as slowing or blocking research development and dissemination.25,35 A tension related to data ownership to ensure risks and benefits are considered for communities, individual research participants, and research funders also exists.What has been lacking in these discussions to date has been research about the associations of governance with agreements, control of resources, productivity, and perceived outcomes of CEnR. Agreements are the accepted standards or protocols for the research partnership such as mission and objectives, group dynamics, and dissemination.12,39 Control of resources is whether the community, academic institution, or both hire personnel and manage project resources.12,40 Research productivity measures include garnering funding, disseminating scholarship, developing new measures centered in cultural or community perspectives, and establishing new research regulation.3,23,28,30 These measures are important as the need to generate, disseminate, and regulate new knowledge and practices are core goals of funding agencies and, to a lesser extent, communities.Perceived outcomes of CEnR focus on the contributions to health, and encompass changes in power relations, sustainability, community transformation, improved health of the community, and capacity building for individuals and agencies.12 These outcomes are important as they are health outcomes or factors that enhance public health. Ultimately, the success of a CEnR project is determined by research productivity and improvement of health outcomes.The notion of governance also has often been a source of mystery and conflict in research partnerships. We sought to foster understanding and provide context around governance as “stewardship” in research partnerships in both native and nonnative communities by focusing on the type of final approval of CEnR—the body or individual who endorsed and approved the project on behalf of the community and allowed it to continue. This approval is a key factor for legitimacy, community involvement, oversight, and guidance of the project.26,35 Furthermore, the type of approval has not been studied, whereas the general oversight of research ethics through community or tribal IRBs has garnered recent research focus.21,33,38 Examining the type of approval allows an exploration of how governance as stewardship balances needs for authority and accountability, control and capacity building, and protection and benefits.     

Care-seeking and quality of care for outpatient sick children in rural Hebei,China: a cross-sectional study

Aim

To assess the quality of outpatient pediatric care provided by township and village doctors, prevalence of common childhood diseases, care-seeking behavior, and coverage of key interventions in Zhao County in China.

Methods

We conducted two cross-sectional surveys: 1) maternal, newborn, and child health household survey including1601 caregivers of children younger than two years; 2) health facility survey on case management of 348 sick children younger than five years by local health workers and assessment of the availability of drugs and supplies in health facility.

Results

Our household survey showed that the prevalence of fever, cough, and diarrhea was 16.8%, 9.2%, and 15.6% respectively. Caregivers of children with fever, cough, and diarrhea sought care primarily in village clinics and township hospitals. Only 41.2% of children with suspected pneumonia received antibiotics, and very few children with diarrhea received oral rehydration solutions (1.2%) and zinc (4.4%). Our facility survey indicated that very few sick children were fully assessed, and only 43.8% were correctly classified by health workers when compared with the gold standard. Use of antibiotics for sick children was high and not according to guidelines.

Conclusion

We showed poor quality of services for outpatient sick children in Zhao County. Since Integrated Management of Childhood Illness strategy has shown positive effects on child health in some areas of China, it is advisable to implement it in other areas as well.Globally the number of deaths of children younger than five years decreased from 9.6 million to 7.6 million between 2000 and 2010, despite increases in the number of live births (1-3). During the past 20 years China made great achievements concerning child survival. Between 1990 and 2006, under-five mortality rate decreased from 64.6 to 20.6 per 1000 live births, and Millennium Development Goal 4 (MDG4) was achieved nine years ahead of the target set for 2015 (4-6). In 2011, under-five mortality rate was further reduced to 15.6 per 1000 live births (7). While this progress is remarkable, there remains the challenge of urban-rural mortality rate differences. Under-five mortality rate in rural areas was 2.7 times higher than in urban areas, 19.1 and 7.1 per 1000 live births, respectively (7).Under-five mortality decrease was achieved by focusing on social development and sustained economic growth and investments in health system, including expansion of health intervention coverage (8-10). However, these were much lower in rural areas. In 2010, rural residents’ net income per capita was 5919 Yuan, which was less than one third of urban residents’ income (19 109 Yuan) (11), and the health expenditure per capita in urban areas was 3.5 times lower than in rural areas, 2316 Yuan vs 666 Yuan (7). In 2009, the number of health professionals per 1000 population was 6.03 in urban and 2.46 in rural areas, respectively (12). These factors reduce overall rural health care quality as well as the quality of pediatric care, which in rural China is often less than desirable (13-15).To improve child survival, in the mid-1990s the World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nation’s Children Funds (UNICEF) jointly developed the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) strategy (16,17). The IMCI strategy has reduced the number of deaths due to diarrhea, pneumonia, malaria, measles, and malnutrition, which was estimated to 70% of all global deaths of children younger than 5 years at that time (18). IMCI has already been introduced into more than 100 countries (WHO 2005). In China it was introduced in 1998 and since 2003 has been expanded to 46 counties in 11 provinces, considerably improving health workers’ skills (19,20). Although IMCI has been in force in China for more than 10 years, training coverage remains very low for township and village doctors (21).In 2010, the Ministry of Health of China launched a research project aiming to explore the use of appropriate medical techniques in rural areas, and IMCI was selected as a key component of the project. We carried out a household survey and a health facility survey in Zhao County, Hebei Province before IMCI implementation. The household survey aimed to assess the prevalence of common childhood diseases, care-seeking behaviors, and population coverage of key interventions, and the health facility survey aimed to assess the quality of outpatient pediatric care by township and village doctors.     

Fusion rate following extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusion

Introduction

Lumbar fusion has been found to be a clinically effective procedure in adult patients. The lateral transpsoas approach allows for direct visualization of the intervertebral space, significant support of the vertebral anterior column, while avoiding the complications associated with the posterior procedures. The aim of this study is to determine the fusion rate of inter body fusion using computed tomography in patients treated by extreme lateral intersomatic fusion (XLIF) technique.

Materials and methods

All patients intervened by XLIF procedure between 2009 and 2013 by a single operating team at a single institution were recruited for this study. A clinical evaluation and a CT scan of the involved spinal segments were then performed with at least 1-year follow-up following the standard clinical practice in the center.

Results

A total of 77 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 53 were available for review with a mean follow-up of 34.5 (12–62) months. A total of 68 (87.1 %) of the 78 operated levels were considered as completely fused, 8 (10.2 %) were considered as stable, probably fused, and 2 (2.6 %) of the operated levels were diagnosed as pseudarthrosis. When stratified by type of graft material complete fusion was obtained in 75 % of patients in which autograft was used to fill the cages, compared to 89 % of patients in which calcium triphosphate was used, and 83 % of patients in which Attrax? was used.

Discussion

Reports of XLIF fusion rate in the literature vary from 85 to 93 % at 1-year follow-up. Fusion rate in our series corroborates data from previous publications. The results of this series confirm that anterior inter body fusion by means of XLIF approach is a technique that achieves high fusion rate and satisfactory clinical outcomes.

     

Flexible Removable Partial Denture Prosthesis: A Survey of Dentists’ Attitudes and Knowledge in Greece and Croatia

Purpose

The aim of this study was to investigate through a questionnaire the knowledge, attitudes and possible differences in the use of flexible RPDPs among dentists in Greece and Croatia.

Material and Methods

A questionnaire of 16 questions was originally created in English, translated into Greek and Croatian language following a two way translation and tested for apprehension, precision, clarity and homogeneity by a number of native English speaking Greek and Croatian dentists. Following the necessary corrections, the questionnaires replicated in two online surveys and their addresses with an informed consent were sent by emails to nearly 4000 dentists in each country to participate. Collected data were analyzed by chi-square tests at a= .05 level of significance.

Results

378 dentists from Greece and 304 from Croatia participated in the study. 137(36.2%) dentists from Greece and 56(18.4%) from Croatia provided flexible RPDPs to their patients. Statistical analysis for all providers indicated no significant difference between genders (P>.05), significant differences between age groups (P<.01), years of practice (P<.05), specialization (P <.001), and instruction on flexible prostheses (P <.001). The analysis between the two countries showed differences for gender and age groups (P<.01) but no differences between experienced, specialized or instructed groups (P >.05).

Conclusion

The survey indicated differences between the two countries in the percentages of dentists using, selecting and providing RPDPs for their patients. Practitioners’ age, years in practice and instruction were associated with the provision of the prostheses, while comfort, esthetics and cost were the reasons for deciding to use the flexible RPDPs.

Conclusion

Although dentists are not educated in their schools about flexible RPDPs, almost a third of them offer this treatment to their patients. Long term success of these devices depends on clinical education, more experience and definitely more research.