To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Disparities exist in the health, livelihood, and opportunities for the 46-60 million people living in America’s rural communities. Rural communities across the United States need a new energy and focus concentrated around health and health care that allows for the designing capturing, and spreading of existing and new innovations. This paper aims to provide a framework for policy solutions to build a healthier rural America describing both the current state of rural health policy and the policies and practices in states that could be used as a national model for positive change.
Our aim was to develop a brief cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) protocol to augment treatment for social anxiety disorder (SAD). This protocol focused specifically upon fear of positive evaluation (FPE). To our knowledge, this is the first protocol that has been designed to systematically target FPE.
To test the feasibility of a brief (two-session) CBT protocol for FPE and report proof-of-principle data in the form of effect sizes.
Seven patients with a principal diagnosis of SAD were recruited to participate. Following a pre-treatment assessment, patients were randomized to either (a) an immediate CBT condition (n = 3), or (b) a comparable wait-list (WL) period (2 weeks; n = 4). Two WL patients also completed the CBT protocol following the WL period (delayed CBT condition). Patients completed follow-up assessments 1 week after completing the protocol.
A total of five patients completed the brief, FPE-specific CBT protocol (two of the seven patients were wait-listed only and did not complete delayed CBT). All five patients completed the protocol and provided 1-week follow-up data. CBT patients demonstrated large reductions in FPE-related concerns as well as overall social anxiety symptoms, whereas WL patients demonstrated an increase in FPE-related concerns.
Our brief FPE-specific CBT protocol is feasible to use and was associated with large FPE-specific and social anxiety symptom reductions. To our knowledge, this is the first treatment report that has focused on systematic treatment of FPE in patients with SAD. Our protocol warrants further controlled evaluation.
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Diverse medication-based studies require longitudinal drug dose information. EHRs can provide such data, but multiple mentions of a drug in the same clinical note can yield conflicting dose. We aimed to develop statistical methods which address this challenge by predicting the valid dose in the event that conflicting doses are extracted. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We extracted dose information for two test drugs, tacrolimus and lamotrigine, from Vanderbilt EHRs using a natural language processing system, medExtractR, which was developed by our team. A random forest classifier was used to estimate the probability of correctness for each extracted dose on the basis of subject longitudinal dosing patterns and extracted EHR note context. Using this feasibility measure and other features such as a summary of subject dosing history, we developed several statistical models to predict the dose on the basis of the extracted doses. The models developed based on supervised methods included a separate random forest regression, a transition model, and a boosting model. We also considered unsupervised methods and developed a Bayesian hierarchical model. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We compared model-predicted doses to physician-validated doses to evaluate model performance. A random forest regression model outperformed all proposed models. As this model is a supervised model, its utility would depend on availability of validated dose. Our preliminary result from a Bayesian hierarchical model showed that it can be a promising alternative although performing less optimally. The Bayesian hierarchical model would be especially useful when validated dose data are not available, as it was developed in unsupervised modeling framework and hence does not require validated dose that can be difficult and time consuming to obtain. We evaluated the feasibility of each method for automatic implementation in our drug dosing extraction and processing system we have been developing. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: We will incorporate the developed methods as a part of our complete medication extraction system, which will allow to automatically prepare large longitudinal medication dose datasets for researchers. Availability of such data will enable diverse medication-based studies with drastically reduced barriers to data collection.
To sustainably improve cleaning of high-touch surfaces (HTSs) in acute-care hospitals using a multimodal approach to education, reduction of barriers to cleaning, and culture change for environmental services workers.
The study was conducted in 2 academic acute-care hospitals, 2 community hospitals, and an academic pediatric and women’s hospital.
Frontline environmental services workers.
A 5-module educational program, using principles of adult learning theory, was developed and presented to environmental services workers. Audience response system (ARS), videos, demonstrations, role playing, and graphics were used to illustrate concepts of and the rationale for infection prevention strategies. Topics included hand hygiene, isolation precautions, personal protective equipment (PPE), cleaning protocols, and strategies to overcome barriers. Program evaluation included ARS questions, written evaluations, and objective assessments of occupied patient room cleaning. Changes in hospital-onset C. difficile infection (CDI) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) bacteremia were evaluated.
On average, 357 environmental service workers participated in each module. Most (93%) rated the presentations as ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ and agreed that they were useful (95%), reported that they were more comfortable donning/doffing PPE (91%) and performing hand hygiene (96%) and better understood the importance of disinfecting HTSs (96%) after the program. The frequency of cleaning individual HTSs in occupied rooms increased from 26% to 62% (P < .001) following the intervention. Improvement was sustained 1-year post intervention (P < .001). A significant decrease in CDI was associated with the program.
A novel program that addressed environmental services workers’ knowledge gaps, challenges, and barriers was well received and appeared to result in learning, behavior change, and sustained improvements in cleaning.
Can an employer refuse to hire someone who tests positive for nicotine or alcohol? Can an airline or movie theatre require overweight customers to purchase two seats? Can a health insurance company refuse to sell policies to those most in need of medical care? Can the government condition public assistance on wellness program participation or work activity? In this illuminating book, Jessica L. Roberts and Elizabeth Weeks consider these and similar questions, offering readers a nuanced analysis of when and why discrimination based on health status - or 'healthism' - should be allowed, and when it should not. They provide a methodology to distinguish desirable health-based classifications from the undesirable, and propose law and policy solutions to encourage the former and limit the latter. This work should be read by anyone concerned with how government does - and does not - regulate based on health.
This article provides a broad survey of issues facing rural communities and suggests that medicalization of poverty concepts and interventions need to be tailored to those populations. Rural poverty may be both broader and deeper than in urban areas. Those challenges seem to produce a constellation of health conditions, as rural residents struggle with unemployment and lack of opportunities. Relatedly, rural communities struggle to maintain financially viable hospitals and specialty providers. The article closes by offering a snapshot of rural-specific strategies to address these issues.
Low energy and protein intakes have been associated with an increased risk of malnutrition in outpatients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to assess the energy and protein intakes of hospitalised COPD patients according to nutritional risk status and requirements, and the relative contribution from meals, snacks, drinks and oral nutritional supplements (ONS), and to examine whether either energy or protein intake predicts outcomes. Subjects were COPD patients (n 99) admitted to Landspitali University Hospital in 1 year (March 2015–March 2016). Patients were screened for nutritional risk using a validated screening tool, and energy and protein intake for 3 d, 1–5 d after admission to the hospital, was estimated using a validated plate diagram sheet. The percentage of patients reaching energy and protein intake ≥75 % of requirements was on average 59 and 37 %, respectively. Malnourished patients consumed less at mealtimes and more from ONS than lower-risk patients, resulting in no difference in total energy and protein intakes between groups. No clear associations between energy or protein intake and outcomes were found, although the association between energy intake, as percentage of requirement, and mortality at 12 months of follow-up was of borderline significance (OR 0·12; 95 % CI 0·01, 1·15; P=0·066). Energy and protein intakes during hospitalisation in the study population failed to meet requirements. Further studies are needed on how to increase energy and protein intakes during hospitalisation and after discharge and to assess whether higher intake in relation to requirement of hospitalised COPD patients results in better outcomes.
Stigma can lead to poor health outcomes. At the same time, people who are perceived as unhealthy may experience stigma as the result of that perception. As part of a larger project examining discrimination on the basis of health status or “healthism,” we explore the role of stigma in producing disadvantage based on health status. Specifically, we look to the principles of health equality and health justice. An intervention violates health equality when it is driven by animus, which can be the result of stigma. Additionally, laws and policies offend health justice when they worsen health outcomes or they create or deepen health disparities. An intervention that produces stigma — whether intentionally or unintentionally — may offend health justice by making people worse off, in absolute or in comparative terms. Stigma-related health laws and policies can therefore be healthist in at least two ways. We therefore conclude that stigma should neither be the basis, nor the product, of efforts to improve health.