Search

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low among Hispanics; thus understanding screening barriers and facilitators is essential. A survey, based on blended health promotion theories, was conducted with low income, mostly immigrant, Hispanics at community based organizations and health clinics in New York City. Correlates of undergoing colonoscopy screening were examined. Four hundred men (28%) and women were interviewed. Older age, longer US residence, having a regular health care provider and provider recommendation predicted colonoscopy receipt (P values <0.01). Greater fear and worry concerning colonoscopy and fewer perceived screening benefits were associated with reduced screening likelihood (P values <0.05). In a multivariate model, colonoscopy receipt was negatively associated with Medicaid and positively associated with English preference, physician recommendation for and encouragement of screening and less fear. Interventions that educate physicians and patients regarding colonoscopy screening guidelines, increase physicians' screening referrals, and reduce patients' fear are needed.

Background: Learning can be divided in two types: the unconscious learning and the significant learning. The critical aptitude for reading clinical research articles is a learning experience that reflects the doctor's active participation in article reading., Objective: To know the degree of aptitude for critical reading of clinical research articles in specialists under training., Material and Methods: To all the specialist that were under training in the different services of the Hospital, a previous validated evaluation instrument for critical reading of clinical research studies was applied. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney's U test were used for statistical analysis., Results: After the application of the evaluation instrument, it was found that the global score had a median of 42.5 (12-89) points. In the results obtained by indicator it was found that there was a greater score for to interpret, than for to judge and for to propose. In the analysis of domain degrees according to the interpret indicator, the greater proportion was in low level. According to the indicators to judge and to propose, most of the results were in the by chance expected level., Conclusion: The critical reading aptitude it's not developed in specialized physicians that are under training. The development of this aptitude will allow them to have a greater profit in their courses.

Objective: To establish a description of the psychiatric population of the Instituto Nacional de Perinatología (INPer), as well as of the exposed newborns to psychopharmacological treatment during the gestation., Material and Method: One hundred forty-six women were gathered, by means of serial files; 85 of them had an obstetric episode of high risk and 61 were assisted in the institution due to gynecological alterations. A clinical psychologist and a psychiatrist carried out, each one, an interview and the clinical history of all the women. Once the type diagnosis was determined (DSM-IV), they received psicotherapeutical, pharmacological or mixed treatment, until the resolution of the obstetric episode and the gathering of the neonatal data., Results: The findings reported that the prevalence or mental disorders (DSM-IV) that are not adaptive at the INPer is 1.8%. The diagnostic distribution of the psychiatric population ranked in first place the affective disorders (63.7%), particularly major depression disorder (42.5%). These percentages correspond at the institutional total population's 1.19 and 0.79. As for the treatment type, 57 women received psychotherapy, 75 received psychopharmacological treatment and 14 received both treatments. The newborn babies of obstetric patients who received psychopharmacological treatment did not show differences in Apgar, weight, size, complications or obstetric resolution in comparison with patients who received psychotherapy and again with respect to institutional media., Discussion: The prevalence found in the Institution is significantly inferior to that reported at a national and global level, due to the use of two diagnostic interviews by mental health specialists. The wrong use of the sieve is one of the reasons for overdiagnosis in mental health.