Search

Background: Down syndrome (DS) is characterized by impaired memory span, particularly auditory verbal memory span. Memory span is linked developmentally to several language capabilities, and may be a basic capacity that enables language learning. If children with DS had better memory span, they might benefit more from language intervention. The present study evaluates a home-based parent-implemented intervention designed to improve auditory memory span in children with DS. Method: Sixteen children with DS, age 6-14, completed one or two 3-month periods of memory training using overt cumulative rehearsal and auditory-only procedures. Children were divided into two groups. Group 1 completed 3 months of memory training followed by 3 months of visual activities, followed by three more months of memory training. Group 2 had the opposite schedule. Before and after each 3-month period, children came into the laboratory for memory assessment. Results: Children improved in training sessions and a small amount on digit span, the primary proximal outcome assessment measure. Digit span improvement was linked to the memory training, as indicated by control comparisons and correlations. Improvement was correlated with language comprehension and verbal working memory, but not with non-verbal ability, age or home/behavioural variables. No improvement was evident on distal outcome measures (sentence memory and verbal working memory); however, a phonological similarity effect emerged coincidence with memory training, suggesting increased use of phonological codes in memory. Conclusions: Results suggest that some children with DS can improve their auditory verbal memory span with home-based rehearsal training, at least in limited ways. Children with good language and verbal working memory skills may be the best candidates for this type of training, even though they may show only small improvements. Still, small improvements in a severely impaired function are noteworthy, and justify further investigation. (Contains 2 figures and 3 tables.)

ABSTRACT: This case study of the public policy implications of introducing a new technology in radiology, namely, low-osmolar contrast media (LOCM), raises the issues of whether and how to place appropriate limits on new technologies. Although these contrast media represent small episodic costs, they may add up to an aggregate expenditure of nearly $1 billion per year if used for all contrast injections. As a result, this technology raises a number of important medical, economic, legal, and public policy questions. Our cost-effectiveness analysis and an analysis of the medical evidence suggest that LOCM should be limited to high-risk patients. We discuss in this article how the legal system might respond to such limitations, and we consider various public policy options for adopting restrictions on use. We conclude that the medical profession should take the lead in developing protocols for appropriate assessment, reimbursement, and use of LOCM.

Objective: To evaluate which clinical factors were predictive of treatment choice for patients with pelvic organ prolapse.Methods: One hundred fifty-two patients were enrolled in this cross-sectional study to collect clinical data on potential predictors of treatment choice. Continuous parametric, continuous nonparametric (ordinal), and categoric data were compared with chosen management plan (expectant, pessary, surgery) using analysis of variance, the Kruskal-Wallis test, and the chi(2) test for association, respectively. All significant predictors (P <.05) of treatment choice for pelvic organ prolapse identified during univariate analysis were entered into a backward elimination polytomous logistic regression analysis for predicting surgery versus pessary versus expectant management, with surgery as the reference group.Results: The probability of choosing expectant management rather than surgery 1). increases as the preoperative pelvic pain score increases (odds ratio [OR] 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07, 2.40; P =.024) and 2). decreases as the prolapse severity increases (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.29, 0.72; P =.001). The probability of choosing pessary rather than surgery 1). increases as age increases (OR 1.1; 95% CI 1.05, 1.16; P <.001), 2). decreases as the prolapse severity increases (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.60, 0.99; P =.042), and 3). is less if the participant had prior prolapse surgery (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.07, 0.76; P =.017).Conclusion: Age, prior prolapse surgery, preoperative pelvic pain scores, and pelvic organ prolapse severity were independently associated with treatment choices in a predictable way and provide physicians with medical evidence necessary to support a patient's decision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]