A total of 179 Tyneside children who had suffered at least one episode of wheeze since school entry were seen at the age of 7. All but 14 had visited a doctor for chest symptoms, but a diagnosis of asthma had been offered to the parents of only 21 children, including three of the 56 -children experiencing four to 12 wheezy episodes a year and 11 of the 31 children experiencing more than 12 episodes a year. Bronchodilator treatment was rarely offered in the absence of such a diagnosis, and two thirds of the children had never received a bronchodilator. Of the children experiencing four or more episodes a year, only a third had received bronchodilator drugs regularly, though half had lost more than 50 days from school because of wheeze. School absenteeism fell 10-fold in the 31 children finally offered continuous prophylactic treatment. Although many doctors had feared that use of the word "asthma" would cause anxiety, parents were uniformly relieved when given an explanation of their child's recurrent wheeze.This study uncovered a disturbing amount of ill health in children that was easily rectified. Probably this same problem exists in other areas.
Telephone interviews utilizing random digit dialing were conducted in Los Angeles County to assess the public's knowledge of differences between ophthalmologists and optometrists and to determine factors predictive of knowledge status. Knowledge status was determined by performance on a questionnaire specifically designed for this study. Using multiple logistic regression analysis for simultaneous evaluation of potentially predictive factors, higher education, history of prior eye examination as an adult, and history of prior or present contact lens or spectacle wear were associated with scoring as knowledgeable. Predicted probabilities of being knowledgeable and not knowledgeable were presented for all combinations of these predictive variables. Such information may be helpful in guiding public education campaigns regarding eye care.
Background Digital rectal examination (DRE) is a valuable diagnostic tool for diagnosing multiple conditions, but its use has declined in practice. This study sought to provide perspectives on current attitudes, enablers, and barriers to performing DRE for doctors-in-training (DiTs) and explore strategies to improve and facilitate consistent, efficient, and effective execution of DRE. Methodology Self-reported DRE practice among DiTs (n = 1,652) across three metropolitan health service regions in Western Australia was surveyed using a de-identified multiple-response ranking, dichotomous quantitative and qualitative survey. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 27 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results A total of 452 (27%) DiTs responded to the survey, with an even distribution of key demographics between regions and specialties. The median post-graduate year was 2. Half of DiTs reported being comfortable with performing DRE. Most had training in medical school (71%), while 9.7% had no training in DRE. Chaperone availability, perceived invasiveness, and lack of confidence were key barriers; key enablers were formal training and senior colleague/departmental support. The multivariate logistic regression showed that DiTs who reported being comfortable in performing DRE were significantly and independently associated with being a high-volume practitioner (p < 0.001), confident in diagnosing benign (p < 0.001) or malignant pathology (p < 0.001), perceived adequate DRE training (p < 0.001), prior formal DRE training (p = 0.007), and surgical subspeciality interest (p = 0.030). Conclusions Low levels of confidence and comfort in the performance of DRE among DiTs have resulted in the underutilization of a critical diagnostic tool. Future curriculum and departmental clinical practice interventions should address barriers while promoting enablers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.