Search

A variety of terms, such as "antiepileptic," "anticonvulsant," and "antiseizure" have been historically applied to medications for the treatment of seizure disorders. Terminology is important because using terms that do not accurately reflect the action of specific treatments may result in a misunderstanding of their effects and inappropriate use. The present International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) position paper used a Delphi approach to develop recommendations on English‐language terminology applicable to pharmacological agents currently approved for treating seizure disorders. There was consensus that these medications should be collectively named "antiseizure medications". This term accurately reflects their primarily symptomatic effect against seizures and reduces the possibility of health care practitioners, patients, or caregivers having undue expectations or an incorrect understanding of the real action of these medications. The term "antiseizure" to describe these agents does not exclude the possibility of beneficial effects on the course of the disease and comorbidities that result from the downstream effects of seizures, whenever these beneficial effects can be explained solely by the suppression of seizure activity. It is acknowledged that other treatments, mostly under development, can exert direct favorable actions on the underlying disease or its progression, by having "antiepileptogenic" or "disease‐modifying" effects. A more‐refined terminology to describe precisely these actions needs to be developed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on COVID-19 pandemic highlighting the contributions critical care. Topics include intensive care units (ICUs) around the world suddenly inundated with patients who were critically ill from an unknown virus, along with all the other patients needing critical care services; and warrants consideration of energy, clinical supplies, pharmaceuticals, technical equipment and physical facilities.

Open Dialogue is a need‐adapted approach to mental health care that was originally developed in Finland. Like other need‐adapted approaches, Open Dialogue aims to meet consumer's needs and promote collaborative person‐centred dialogue to support recovery. Need‐adapted mental health care is distinguished by flexibility and responsiveness. Fidelity, defined from an implementation science perspective as the delivery of distinctive interventions in a high quality and effective fashion is a key consideration in health care. However, flexibility presents challenges for evaluating fidelity, which is much easier to evaluate when manualization and reproducible processes are possible. Hence, it remains unclear whether Open Dialogue and other need‐adapted mental health interventions can be meaningfully evaluated for fidelity. The aim of this paper was to critically appraise and advance the evaluation of fidelity in need‐adapted mental health care, using Open Dialogue as a case study. The paper opens a discussion about how fidelity should be evaluated in flexible, complex interventions, and identifies key questions that need to be asked by practitioners working in need‐adapted mental health care to ensure they deliver these interventions as intended and in an evidence‐based fashion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In its mission to optimise the quality of patient care and the level of clinician training within the fields of biotherapy, the BioTherapeutics, Education and Research (BTER) Foundation and its Maggot Therapy Competency Committee identified qualities and achievements assessed to be the minimum standards that health care professionals should attain in order to be deemed competent in maggot therapy. The set of six standards were selected to reflect the same high degree of professionalism that is used by the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education for assessing other medical specialists, but with an emphasis on the principles and practice of maggot therapy. For each domain in which competency is expected, the rationale has been explained, specific competencies have been articulated, and methods for demonstrating or evaluating those competencies have been suggested. Applicable to any clinician applying maggot dressings professionally, these recommendations should assist those who wish to identify, assess, or achieve competency in maggot therapy. Specifically, these six competencies include: (1) knowledge about wound care in general and maggot therapy in particular; (2) skill in general patient care, to a level commensurate with their professional role; (3) ability to communicate effectively with colleagues, patients, and the general public; (4) professional and ethical behaviour; (5) ability to deliver systems‐based health care; (6) incorporation of continuing education and quality improvement into their practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic and the UK government's subsequent coronavirus action plan have fundamentally impacted on every aspect of healthcare. One area that is severely affected is ear, nose and throat (ENT)/laryngology where speech and language therapists (SLTs) engage in a diverse range of practice with patients with a range of conditions, including voice disorders, airway problems, and head and neck cancers (HNCs). A large majority of these patients are in high‐risk categories, and many specialized clinical practices are vulnerable. In addition, workforce and research issues are challenged in both the immediate context and the future. Aims: To discuss the threats and opportunities from the COVID‐19 pandemic for SLTs in ENT/laryngology with specific reference to clinical practice, workforce and research leadership. Methods & Procedures: The relevant sections of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) health systems building blocks framework (2007) were used to structure the study. Expert agreement was determined by an iterative process of multiple‐group discussions, the use of all recent relevant policy documentation, and other literature and shared documentation/writing. The final paper was verified and agreed by all authors. Main Contribution: The main threats to ENT/laryngology SLT clinical services include increased patient complexity related to COVID‐19 voice and airway problems, delayed HNC diagnosis, reduced access to instrumental procedures and inequitable care provision. The main clinical opportunities include the potential for new modes of service delivery and collaborations, and harnessing SLT expertise in non‐instrumental assessment. There are several workforce issues, including redeployment (and impact on current services), training implications and psychological impact on staff. Workforce opportunities exist for service innovation and potential extended ENT/SLT practice roles. Research is threatened by a reduction in immediate funding calls and high competition. Current research is affected by very limited access to participants and the ability to conduct face‐to‐face and instrumental assessments. However, research opportunities may result in greater collaboration, and changes in service delivery necessitate robust investigation and evaluation. A new national set of research priorities is likely to emerge. Conclusions & Implications: The immediate impact of the pandemic has resulted in major disruption to all aspects of clinical delivery, workforce and research for ENT/laryngology SLT. It is unclear when any of these areas will resume operations and whether permanent changes to clinical practice, professional remits and research priorities will follow. However, significant opportunity exists in the post‐COVID era to re‐evaluate current practice, embrace opportunities and evaluate new ways of working. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectENT/laryngology SLTs manage patients with a range of conditions, including voice disorders, airway problems and HNCs. The diverse scope of clinical practice involves highly specialized assessment and treatment practices in patients in high‐risk categories. A large majority of active research projects in this field are patient focused and involve instrumental assessment. The COVID‐19 pandemic has created both opportunities and threats for ENT SLT clinical services, workforce and research.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study provides a discussion of the threats and opportunities from the COVID‐19 pandemic for ENT/laryngology SLT with specific reference to clinical practice, workforce and research leadership.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?The COVID‐19 pandemic has resulted in major disruption to all aspects of clinical delivery, workforce and research for ENT/laryngology SLT. Changes to clinical practice, professional remits and research priorities are of indeterminant duration at this time, and some components could be permanent. Significant clinical practice, workforce and research opportunities may exist in the post‐COVID era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

B Results: b The most common modality of treatment was laser excision (87 patients) followed by scalpel excision (17 patients), surveillance (13 patients) and laser ablation (2 patients). Where patient's orthodontic treatment was completed at specialist orthodontic practice, the electronic referral system was reviewed to identify patients from the cohort who were referred for re-exposure of teeth bonded. B Outcomes: b In the COVID recovery period, only 17% of patients had dentoalveolar treatment within 6 months of assessment; all of which were under local anaesthetic (LA) or LA + intravenous sedation (IVS); 10% of patients had evidence of potential harm, including possible further root resorption and retaining decayed teeth. We present patient related outcome and experience data for those treated with sedation, as well as evidence the consequences a long waiting list poses to quality of life for paediatric patients. [Extracted from the article]

The article offers several position papers related to dental education by the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) in the U.S. The papers, approved by the 2003 House of Delegates, are presented as reference for dental education, dental educators and institution in the educational program. Specifically, it discusses freedom and responsibilities of individuals and institutions, health care, and due process for students in dental education.

Background: This position paper highlights the opportunistic integral role of the pharmacist across the patient pathway utilizing cardiovascular care as an example. The paper aims to highlight the potential roles that pharmacists worldwide can have (or already have) to provide efficient patient care in the context of interprofessional collaboration. Methods: It results from a literature review and experts seeking advice to identify existing interventions and potential innovative interventions. We developed a conceptual framework highlighting seven critical phases in the patient pathway and for each of those listed some of the initiatives identified by our experts worldwide. Results: Existing pharmacists' interventions in each of these phases have been identified globally. Various examples in the area of prevention and self‐management were found to exist for long; the contribution for early detection and subsequently to timely diagnosis were also quite clear; integration of care was perhaps one of the areas needing greater development, although interventions in secondary care were also quite common. Tertiary care and end of life interventions were found to often be left for other healthcare professionals. Conclusion: On the basis of the findings, we can argue that much has been done but globally consider that pharmacists are still an untapped resource potentially useful for improved patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the position papers approved by the 2003 House of Delegates of the American Dental Education Association. It discusses statement on peer review and statement on health care programs. It examines freedoms and responsibilities of individuals and institutions. It explains the due process for students in dental education.

Objective: The medical specialty of physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) has had a proven impact on persons with disability and on health care systems. Documents such as The White Book on Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine in Europe have been important in defining the scope of practice within various regions. However, on some continents, the practice has not been well defined. Design: To explore the practice of PM&R in subSaharan Africa and Antarctica. Methods: Medline searches, membership data searches, fax survey of medical schools, Internet searches, and interviews with experts. Results: The continents are dissimilar in terms of climate and government. However both Antarctica and subSaharan Africa have no PM&R training programs, no professional organizations, no specialty board requirements, and no practicing physicians in the field. Because there are no known disabled children on Antarctica and adults are airlifted to world-class health care, the consequences of this deficit are minimal there. However, the 788,000,000 permanent residents of subSaharan Africa, including approximately 78 million persons with disability, are left unserved. Conclusions: Antarctica is doing fine. Africa is in a crisis. Local medical schools, hospitals doctors, and persons with disability; along with foreign volunteers, aid groups, and policymakers can impact the crisis. However government—specifically national ministries of health—is ultimately responsible for the health and wellbeing of citizens. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]