Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

D MacAuley

Publications and source records attributed to D MacAuley.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Do textbooks agree on their advice on ice?

OBJECTIVE: To study ice therapy guidance in sports medicine textbooks. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of a convenience sample of textbooks. STUDY SELECTION: 45 general sports medicine texts were included in the study. DATA EXTRACTION: The indices and chapter headings of each text were searched using key words "ice," "cryotherapy," "soft tissue injury," "muscle," and "bruise." DATA SYNTHESIS: In 17 of the textbooks, there was no guidance on the duration, frequency, or length of ice treatment or on the use of barriers between ice and the skin. Advice on treatment duration was given in 28 texts but recommendations differed depending on the particular ice therapy, injury location, or severity. There was considerable variation in the recommended duration and frequency of advised treatments. CONCLUSION: There was little guidance in the standard textbooks on ice application, and the advice varied greatly. There is a need for evidence-based sport and exercise medicine with a consensus on the appropriate use of ice in acute soft tissue injury.

Athletic Injuries↗
PubMed2000

Sport and exercise medicine: building the foundations of a new discipline.

New disciplines emerge as medicine evolves. But, to be recognised as a clinical discipline we must be prepared to measure ourselves against established criteria; there should be consensus on the core content of the discipline and an identifiable body of knowledge to allow us to deal with common clinical problems. At this developmental stage in our evolution we have general agreement on what defines sport and exercise medicine but, as most of our clinical skills developed empirically, research is relatively underdeveloped. The volume and quality of this research does not yet reflect a vibrant research culture. The validity of our clinical method is supported by research evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of clinical tests but the evidence supporting other areas of clinical practice is uncertain. Some aspects of prevention have become integrated into clinical practice without sufficient evidence and, screening has been introduced without critical evaluation. To ensure the future success of our discipline and achieve recognition of its value in the wider medical community, we must nurture an evaluative culture and ensure that clinical practice is built on firm foundations of research evidence.

Athletic Injuries↗
PubMed2000

Hospitals do not inform GPs about medication that should be monitored.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners are now asked to prescribe drugs that, due to possible risks and side effects, had previously been prescribed almost exclusively at hospital. OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of hospital letters as the key communication between hospitals and GPs. METHOD: Hospital letters examined using a predetermined protocol. RESULTS: Of 224 patients identified who were taking drugs that required regular monitoring, 173 were commenced in hospital. Fewer than one in five (30; 17%) hospital letters indicated that there was a risk associated with the drug or that it should be routinely monitored. Monitoring frequency was identified on only 14 occasions and the majority of letters (129; 74. 6%) did not state who was to be responsible for ongoing monitoring (either GP or hospital). Information was slow to arrive at the practice and, in 12% of cases, the hospital letter had not arrived within 14 days of commencement of medication. CONCLUSION: The information provided in hospital letters is insufficient to allow GPs to put structures in place to monitor drug therapy.

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems↗
PubMed1999

Sterilization and disinfection in general practice in Northern Ireland.

In view of the recent trend towards more minor surgery being carried out in general practice we decided to conduct a postal survey to assess the level of knowledge of sterilization and disinfection and the use of benchtop sterilizers in general practice in Northern Ireland. The survey, of all 366 practices in the Province, was carried out in January/March 1998. One hundred and eleven (30%) completed questionnaires were returned. All practices performed at least one of a range of procedures requiring sterilization or disinfection, e.g., minor surgery 95%, cervical smear taking 98%, syringing of ears 98%. Only 76% of practices had a benchtop sterilizer and 39% did not have access to a sterile supply department (SSD); 32% of the latter had no desire to utilize such a service. Only 25% and 34% correctly identified the Medical Devices Agency (MDA) definitions of sterilization and disinfection respectively. The MDA Device Bulletin on benchtop sterilizers had been read by only 26% of respondents. There was an 86% interest in attending a workshop on sterilization and disinfection. The concepts and practice of sterilization and disinfection appear not to be clearly understood. We conclude that resources must be identified to provide appropriate education in this important area for primary care staff.

Ambulatory Surgical Procedures↗
PubMed1999

Critical appraisal using the READER method: a workshop-based controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Critical reading is an important skill for those trying to practice evidence-based medicine. There are a number of recognized structures for critical reading, including the READER model. These methods should be subjected to high-quality studies. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the READER method in a practical teaching setting using the highest quality research methodology. METHODS: We carried out a modified randomized controlled trial. Two groups of GP trainers were invited to appraise critically the two articles using either the READER acronym or a semi-structured free appraisal. RESULTS: Of 99 participants in the workshop, 92 completed the study. One-third of participants (33.7%) read more than five articles per month and those who had been in practice the longest read fewer articles (P<0.05). Both groups attributed the lowest score to paper 2. The median total scores were higher using the READER method, although only significant for paper 2 (P<0.05). The median score attributed to the methodology was lower using the READER method than the free appraisal, although this difference was only significant for paper 1 (P<0.05). Overall, 51% (70% of the READER group) believed that taking part in the exercise would encourage them to be more critical of published articles in the future. CONCLUSION: Those using the READER method attributed a higher total score, but were more critical of the methodology than those using a free appraisal. Participants found the study useful and believed that it would be of help in future critical appraisal. The study raises interesting questions about the relative importance to GPs of methodological rigour compared with other factors when evaluating research papers.

Education, Medical, Continuing↗
PubMed1999

Ankle injuries: same joint, different sports.

Specific information on the incidence of ankle injury is not easy to establish, and studies use variable methodology and recording systems. There are problems in recording injury in many sports injury studies (23) as we often cannot calculate the relative risks without denominator data. Although we can estimate that ankle injuries make up about 10-15% of sports-related injury and that soccer and rugby are responsible for most sports-related injury in the United Kingdom, it is difficult to be more specific. Prevention and treatment strategies are also different, and taping and strapping is not widely practiced. Soccer has a particular injury pattern with some injuries particularly associated with the sport.

Ankle Injuries↗
PubMed1999

Vision or heresy.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Accreditation↗
PubMed1999

Warm up.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Humans↗
PubMed1998

Randomised controlled trial of the READER method of critical appraisal in general practice.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the READER model for critical reading by comparing it with a free appraisal, and to explore what factors influence different components of the model. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial in which two groups of general practitioners assessed three papers from the general practice section of the BMJ. SETTING: Northern Ireland. SUBJECTS: 243 general practitioners. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores given using the READER model (Relevance, Education, Applicability, Discrimination, overall Evaluation) and scores given using a free appraisal for scientific quality and an overall total. RESULTS: The hierarchical order for the three papers was different for the two groups, according to the total scores. Participants using the READER method (intervention group) gave a significantly lower total score (P < or = 0.01) and a lower score for the scientific quality (P < or = 0.0001) for all three papers. Overall more than one in five (22%), and more men than women, read more than 5 articles a month (P < or = 0.05). Those who were trainers tended to read more articles (P < or = 0.05), and no trainers admitted to reading none. Overall, 58% (135/234) (68% (76/112) of the intervention group) believed that taking part in the exercise would encourage them to be more critical of published articles in the future (P < or = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Participants using the READER model gave a consistently lower overall score and applied a more appropriate appraisal to the methodology of the studies. The method was both accurate and repeatable. No intrinsic factors influenced the scores, so the model is appropriate for use by all general practitioners regardless of their seniority, location, teaching or training experience, and the number of articles they read regularly.

Education, Medical, Continuing↗