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 firstname.lastname@example.org
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.
To explore whether surgical teams with greater stability among their members (ie, members have worked together more in the past) experience lower rates of sharps-related percutaneous blood and body fluid exposures (BBFE) during surgical procedures.
A 10-year retrospective cohort study.
A single large academic teaching hospital.
Surgical teams participating in surgical procedures (n=333,073) performed during 2001–2010 and 2,113 reported percutaneous BBFE were analyzed.
A social network measure (referred to as the team stability index) was used to quantify the extent to which surgical team members worked together in the previous 6 months. Poisson regression was used to examine the effect of team stability on the risk of BBFE while controlling for procedure characteristics and accounting for procedure duration. Separate regression models were generated for percutaneous BBFE involving suture needles and those involving other surgical devices.
The team stability index was associated with the risk of percutaneous BBFE (adjusted rate ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.88–0.97]). However, the association was stronger for percutaneous BBFE involving devices other than suture needles (adjusted rate ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85–0.99]) than for exposures involving suture needles (0.96 [0.88–1.04]).
Greater team stability may reduce the risk of percutaneous BBFE during surgical procedures, particularly for exposures involving devices other than suture needles. Additional research should be conducted on the basis of primary data gathered specifically to measure qualities of relationships among surgical team personnel.
To use a unique multicomponent administrative data set assembled at a large academic teaching hospital to examine the risk of percutaneous blood and body fluid (BBF) exposures occurring in operating rooms.
A 10-year retrospective cohort design.
A single large academic teaching hospital.
All surgical procedures (n=333,073) performed in 2001–2010 as well as 2,113 reported BBF exposures were analyzed.
Crude exposure rates were calculated; Poisson regression was used to analyze risk factors and account for procedure duration. BBF exposures involving suture needles were examined separately from those involving other device types to examine possible differences in risk factors.
The overall rate of reported BBF exposures was 6.3 per 1,000 surgical procedures (2.9 per 1,000 surgical hours). BBF exposure rates increased with estimated patient blood loss (17.7 exposures per 1,000 procedures with 501–1,000 cc blood loss and 26.4 exposures per 1,000 procedures with >1,000 cc blood loss), number of personnel working in the surgical field during the procedure (34.4 exposures per 1,000 procedures having ≥15 personnel ever in the field), and procedure duration (14.3 exposures per 1,000 procedures lasting 4 to <6 hours, 27.1 exposures per 1,000 procedures lasting ≥6 hours). Regression results showed associations were generally stronger for suture needle–related exposures.
Results largely support other studies found in the literature. However, additional research should investigate differences in risk factors for BBF exposures associated with suture needles and those associated with all other device types.
It is easy to overlook the dramatic progress in the study of social emotions in three decades since the sociology of emotion became a recognized field. We know a great deal about how the physiology of emotion, the cultural forms that shape it, and the interactional situations that evoke it are intertwined, but there has not been one place to go to contemplate this accumulation of knowledge. In its early days, the field was integrated by a fierce debate between social constructionists and positivists. After that controversy lost its fire, however, theorists mainly started to develop their separate strands, often becoming so immersed in developments in areas like the study of gender effects, group processes, and sociobiology that they failed to see the whole picture. Indeed, some pessimists believed that the sociology of emotion had ceased to be a distinctive body of knowledge.
To any of us who lost the intellectual fire that was present in the late 1970s, this remarkable volume will be a useful rekindling. I approached the volume expecting a cogent review of the major theories in the field. I found that and much more. This book is not just an encyclopedic review of major theoretical frameworks, although it could serve that function admirably for a graduate course. Instead it is a creative, thoughtful development of the science of the sociology of emotion.
Jessica and Jim meet in a Hotel room, where they've come to do some work together. Jessica is a Virtuous Secretary; she knows Jim as a famous Evangelist. Jim would rather see their relationship as two potential Lovers. Thinking in these romantic terms, Jim desires Jessica; he applauds her recent work and her appearance, attempting to amuse her. As a Virtuous Secretary, Jessica wasn't expecting this. She tries to address Jim, intends to pacify him if he makes requests, to consult with him about their work for the ministry. Because of his greater power in the situation, Jim grabs the moment and Amuses Jessica with a joke. Jim's reactions to this lively interaction are in keeping with his romantic view of the situation; he feels in love, passionate, pleased, and cheerful. Jessica is somewhat taken aback at this loverlike behavior from her esteemed Evangelist – she is touched but feels moved, awestruck, emotional in response to his expressive attention.
Jim's impulses have not died down; he continues to Entertain Jessica with amusing stories. He desires her sexually. Jessica's somewhat agitated emotional state leads her to try and cool out the interaction by Consulting the Evangelist in a more formal manner about their work plans. He prevails, however (not unlikely, given her inclination to pacify him). He Sleeps With her. He feels great; she feels good but flustered.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.