No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with chest compression only and conventional CPR on outcomes after cardiopulmonary arrest out of hospital. DESIGN: Nationwide population based observational study. SETTING: A nationwide emergency medical service system in Japan. Population All consecutive patients with out of hospital cardiopulmonary arrest, January 2005 to December 2007 in Japan, witnessed at the moment of collapse. Lay people attempted chest compression only CPR (n = 20,707) or conventional CPR (mouth to mouth ventilation and chest compression) (n = 19,328), and patients were transferred to hospital by ambulance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Factors associated with better outcomes (assessed with χ(2), multiple logistic regression analysis, odds ratios and their 95% confidence intervals): one month survival and neurologically favourable one month survival rates defined as category one (good cerebral performance) or two (moderate cerebral disability) of the cerebral performance categories. RESULTS: Conventional CPR was associated with better outcomes than chest compression only CPR, for both one month survival (adjusted odds ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.29) and neurologically favourable one month survival (1.17, 1.01 to 1.35). Neurologically favourable one month survival decreased with increasing age and with delays of up to 10 minutes in starting CPR for both conventional and chest compression only CPR. The benefit of conventional CPR over chest compression only CPR was significantly greater in younger people in non-cardiac cases (P = 0.025) and with a delay in start of CPR after the event was witnessed in non-cardiac cases (P = 0.015) and all cases combined (P = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Conventional CPR is associated with better outcomes than chest compression only CPR for selected patients with out of hospital cardiopulmonary arrest, such as those with arrests of non-cardiac origin and younger people, and people in whom there was delay in the start of CPR.博士（医学）・乙第1266号・平成23年5月30

Food allergies have increased in recent years in Japan. Details of causative foods, places where anaphylaxis developed, and other allergic factors remain unknown, and we investigated them. A'questionnaire survey for the prevention of food allergies' was conducted using a nationwide group of patients with food allergies. A total of 1383 patients from 878 families (including 319 patients who experienced anaphylaxis) provided valid answers to the questionnaire. The average age of the first anaphylactic attack was 3.20 +/- 6.327 yr. The most common allergens causing anaphylaxis were in order milk, eggs, wheat, peanuts, and soybeans, followed by sesame and buckwheat. The most common place where anaphylaxis developed was the patient's own home, followed by fast food restaurants, places visited, restaurants, and schools. In patients' own homes, fast food restaurants (buffet), places visited and schools, the most common allergens were milk, eggs, and wheat. In restaurants and accommodation facilities, eggs were the most common allergen followed by milk. As possible food allergies can cause anaphylaxis, it is necessary to provide precise information for consumers regarding packaged and processed foods.

SUMMARYIn 2003, a lump-sum payment system based on Diagnosis Procedure Combinations (DPC) was introduced to 82 specific function hospitals in Japan. While the US DRG/PPS system is a "per case payment" system, the DPC based payment system adopts a "per day payment." It is generally believed that the Japanese system provides as much of an incentive as the DRG/PPS system to shorten the average length of stay (LOS). We performed an empirical analysis of the effect of LOS shortening on hospital revenue and expenditure under the DPC-based payment system, particularly in cardiovascular diseases. We also point out fundamentally controversial aspects of the current system.A total 109 cases were selected from patients hospitalized at the University of Tokyo Hospital from May to July, 2003 and classified into one of three categories: (1) cardiac catheter interventions, (2) cardiac catheter examinations, and (3) other conservative treatments. We analyzed the changes in profit per day in cases of a reduction in average LOS and an increase in the number of cases.In category (1) profit increased significantly in conjunction with reduced LOS. In category (2) profit increased only minimally. In category (3), profit increased rarely and sometimes decreased.In cases of conservative treatment, profits sometimes decreased because an increase in material costs exceeded the increase in revenue. It therefore became clear that the DPCbased payment system does not decisively provide an economic incentive to reduce LOS in cardiovascular medicine. (Int Heart J 2005; 46: 855-866)