Search

Purpose: This study tested the milk flow rates and variability in flow of currently available nipples used for bottle-feeding infants who are hospitalized. Method: Clinicians in 3 countries were surveyed regarding nipples available to them for feeding infants who are hospitalized. Twenty-nine nipple types were identified, and 10 nipples of each type were tested by measuring the amount of infant formula expressed in 1 min using a breast pump. Mean milk flow rate (mL/min) and coefficient of variation were used to compare nipples within brand and within category (i.e., Slow, Standard, Premature). Results: Flow rates varied widely between nipples, ranging from 2.10 mL/min for the Enfamil Cross-Cut to 85.34 mL/min for the Dr. Brown’s Y-Cut Standard Neck. Variability of flow rates among nipples of the same type ranged from a coefficient of variation of 0.05 for Dr. Brown’s Level 1 Standard- and Wide-Neck to 0.42 for the Enfamil CrossCut. Mean coefficient of variation by brand ranged from 0.08 for Dr. Brown’s to 0.36 for Bionix. Conclusions: Milk flow is an easily manipulated variable that may contribute to the degree of physiologic instability experienced by infants who are medically fragile during oral feeding. This study provides clinicians with information to guide appropriate selection of bottle nipples for feeding infants who are hospitalized [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This paper examines how negative experiences with the health-care system create a lack of confidence in receiving medical care in seven countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Methods The empirical analysis is based on data from the Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey 2007, with nationally representative samples of adults aged 18 and over. For the analysis of the experience of cost barriers and confidence in receiving medical care, we conducted pairwise comparisons of group percentages as well as country-wise multivariate logistic regression models. Results Individuals who have experienced cost barriers show a significantly lower level of confidence in receiving safe and quality medical care than those who have not. This effect is most pronounced in the United States, where people who have foregone necessary treatment because of costs are four times as likely to lack confidence as individuals without the experience of cost barriers (adjusted odds ratio 4.00). In New Zealand, Germany, and Canada, individuals with the experience of cost barriers are twice as likely to report low confidence compared with those without this experience (adjusted odds ratios of 1.95, 2.19 and 2.24, respectively). In the Netherlands and UK, cost barriers are only a marginal phenomenon. Conclusions The fact that the experience of financial barriers considerably lowers confidence indicates that financial incentives, such as private co-payments, have a negative effect on overall public support and therefore on the legitimacy of health-care systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To report the clinical use of the QOLIBRI, a disease-specific measure of health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods: The QOLIBRI, with 37 items in six scales (cognition, self, daily life and autonomy, social relationships, emotions and physical problems) was completed by 795 patients in six languages (Finnish, German, Italian, French, English and Dutch). QOLIBRI scores were examined by variables likely to be influenced by rehabilitation interventions and included socio-demographic, functional outcome, health status and mental health variables. Results: The QOLIBRI was self-completed by 73% of participants and 27% completed it in interview. It was sensitive to areas of life amenable to intervention, such as accommodation, work participation, health status (including mental health) and functional outcome. Conclusion: The QOLIBRI provides information about patient's subjective perception of his/her HRQoL which supplements clinical measures and measures of functional outcome. It can be applied across different populations and cultures. It allows the identification of personal needs, the prioritization of therapeutic goals and the evaluation of individual progress. It may also be useful in clinical trials and in longitudinal studies of TBI recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]