Search

Presents a study on the behaviors of bisexually active men, who are defined as men having sex with a man and a woman, who were compared with men who had sex with men only. Reference to bisexual behaviors in men not being well understood; Methods used in the study; Details on bisexual men being identified as problem drinkers; Results of the study; Discussion on the study.

Presents a study which evaluated the relation between drinking, drug use and unprotected anal intercourse in young men who have sex with men only. Details on efforts to promote behavioral change to reduce human immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV) transmission; Methods used in the study; Information on the characteristics of men whose unsafe behavior increases after drinking; Results of the study; Discussion on the study.

Background: The goal of comparative effectiveness research (CER) is to explain the differential benefits and harms of alternate methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition or to improve the delivery of care. To inform decision making, information from the patient's perspective that reflects outcomes that patients care about are needed and can be collected rigorously using appropriate patient-reported outcomes (PRO). It can be challenging to select the most appropriate PRO measure given the proliferation of such questionnaires over the past 20 years., Objective: In this paper, we discuss the value of PROs within CER, types of measures that are likely to be useful in the CER context, PRO instrument selection, and key challenges associated with using PROs in CER., Methods: We delineate important considerations for defining the CER context, selecting the appropriate measures, and for the analysis and interpretation of PRO data. Emerging changes that may facilitate CER using PROs as an outcome are also reviewed including implementation of electronic and personal health records, hospital and population-based registries, and the use of PROs in national monitoring initiatives. The potential benefits of linking the information derived from PRO endpoints in CER to decision making is also reviewed., Conclusions: The recommendations presented for incorporating PROs in CER are intended to provide a guide to researchers, clinicians, and policy makers to ensure that information derived from PROs is applicable and interpretable for a given CER context. In turn, CER will provide information that is necessary for clinicians, patients, and families to make informed care decisions.

Background: : Reliable and valid assessment instruments in aesthetic surgery are a vital factor in assessing patient satisfaction with physical appearance. Appearance and satisfaction assessments are needed to adequately evaluate quality of life related to changes in the female breast across a variety of surgical interventions. The Breast Evaluation Questionnaire was designed to assess satisfaction with breast attributes., Methods: : The Breast Evaluation Questionnaire is a 55-item assessment that was validated on 1244 women seeking augmentation mammaplasty., Results: : Subscales of the Breast Evaluation Questionnaire include comfort not fully dressed, comfort fully dressed, and satisfaction with breast attributes. The questionnaire has been demonstrated to be valid and reliable for assessing these factors., Conclusions: : The assessment is easy to administer and interpret and is recommended for assessing outcomes among breast augmentation patients, breast reconstruction patients, mastectomy patients, lumpectomy/breast-sparing surgery patients, breast reduction patients, and patients who have sustained trauma or injury to their breasts.

Background: Although there are nearly a quarter of a million hospitalizations for traumatic brain injury (TBI) in the United States each year, data on the outcomes and costs of TBI treatment in the acute-care setting are limited., Methods: Using a large, geographically diverse, multihospital database, we examined inpatient records for persons aged 16 years or older who were hospitalized for TBI between January 1, 1997, and June 30, 1999. Patients were stratified by TBI severity using an adaptation of the Abbreviated Injury Scale for administrative data (ICD/AIS), as follows: 2 = "moderate"; 3 = "serious"; 4 = "severe"; and 5 = "critical." Patient characteristics, patterns of treatment, and outcomes and costs were examined by injury severity and mechanism of injury., Results: Of 8,717 study subjects identified, 12.5% had moderate, 44.8% had serious, 29.6% had severe, and 13.2% had critical TBI. Falls were the most common reported cause of injury (40.8%), followed by motor vehicle crashes (39.3%), blows to the head (11.3%), and gunshot wounds (2.4%). Average length of stay in hospital ranged from 6.7 days for moderate TBI to 17.5 days for critical TBI. The overall rate of death in hospital was relatively low among patients with moderate (1.3%), serious (5.7%), and severe (8.7%) TBIs, but much higher among the most critically injured patients (52.0%). Costs of hospitalization averaged 8,189 dollars for moderate, 14,603 dollars for serious, 16,788 dollars for severe, and 33,537 dollars for critical TBI. Costs also varied by injury type, averaging 20,084 dollars for gunshot wounds, 20,522 dollars for motor vehicle crashes, 15,860 dollars for falls, and 19,949 dollars for blows to the head., Conclusion: The economic burden of TBI in the acute-care setting is substantial; treatment outcomes and costs vary considerably by TBI severity and mechanism of injury.