Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

H Campbell

Publications and source records attributed to H Campbell.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1998

Attitudes of general practitioners to screening for cystic fibrosis.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the views of general practitioners (GPs) about screening for cystic fibrosis. To find out whether and under what conditions they might play a part in the delivery of such programmes. SETTING: All GP practices within the Lothian Health Board area. METHODS: A self administered questionnaire was sent to each of the 532 GPs in the area. RESULTS: 334 (63%) GPs participated in the study. Only 23% of these claimed to have no professional or personal experience of the disorder. 77% of GPs were aware of the existence of a programme of antenatal screening for cystic fibrosis (CF), which had been running in Edinburgh for the past six years, with only 2% unfavourably disposed to it. However, when asked to rank CF screening against antenatal screening for spina bifida and Down's syndrome, or cervical and breast screening, 55% gave it the lowest priority. There was fairly equal support for the screening site being an antenatal clinic, a genetic centre, a family planning clinic, or a GP surgery, but little enthusiasm for programmes in schools or the workplace. Surprisingly, only 13% of GPs thought that screening should be offered to those with a negative family history of the disorder. Although the idea of involvement in screening was favoured, GPs claimed that any aspect of delivery that they undertook would need to be supported. There were no significant differences between the responses of fundholding GPs and non-fundholders. CONCLUSIONS: The low ranking by GPs of CF screening against other programmes, together with the need for support if they were to be involved, suggests that it is currently impractical to move the programme from its existing site in antenatal clinics.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1997

High levels of incorrect use of car seat belts and child restraints in Fife--an important and under-recognised road safety issue.

OBJECTIVE: To pilot data collection instruments and to make a preliminary estimate of the level of incorrect use of car seat belts and child restraints in Fife, Scotland. DESIGN: Cross sectional survey of cars containing adults and children at a number of public sites across Fife in 1995 to assess use of car occupant restraints. Trained road safety officers assessed whether seat restraints were appropriate for the age of the passengers and whether restraints were used correctly. These assessments were based on standards published by the Child Accident Prevention Trust. PARTICIPANTS: The survey gathered data from 596 occupants in 180 cars: 327 adults and 269 children. Ten per cent of drivers who were approached refused to participate. Car occupant restraint was assessed in 180 drivers, 151 front seat passengers, and 265 rear seat passengers. MAIN RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty one occupants wore seat belts, 68 were restrained by a seat belt and booster cushion, 63 in toddler seats, 25 in two way seats, and 18 in rear facing infant carriers. Ninety seven per cent of drivers, 95% of front seat passengers, and 77% of rear seat passengers were restrained. However, in 98 (52%) vehicles at least one passenger was restrained by a device that was used incorrectly. Seven per cent of adults and 28% of children were secured incorrectly. The commonest errors were loose seat belts and restraint devices not adequately secured to the seat. Rates of incorrect use were highest in child seat restraints, reaching 60% with two way seats and 44% with rear facing infant seats. CONCLUSIONS: The incorrect use of car occupant restraints is an under-recognised problem, both by health professionals, and the general public. Incorrect use has been shown to reduce the effectiveness of restraints, can itself result in injury, and is likely to be an important factor in child passenger injuries. The correct use of car seat restraints merits greater attention in strategies aiming to reduce road traffic casualties. Areas of intervention that could be considered include raising public awareness of this problem, improving information and instruction given to those who purchase child restraints, and encouraging increased collaboration between manufacturers of cars and child restraints, in considering safety issues.

Accidents, Traffic↗
PubMed1996

Neuropsychiatry of 18q- syndrome.

Our understanding of neuropsychiatric abnormalities in patients with deletions of the long arm of chromosome 18 (18q- syndrome) is based mainly on sporadic case reports. We characterized the neuropsychiatric phenotype in 27 patients across a wide age range (2-47 years) with breakpoints ranging from 18q22.3-18q21.2. Adaptive behavior scores (Vineland Composite) were significantly higher in females than in males (62 +/- 5 vs. 43 +/- 3). Intelligence ranged from borderline to severely deficient (IQ, 73- < 40), with academic achievement similarly impaired. Performance in specific neuropsychological functions, including attention, novel problem solving, memory, language, visuomotor integration, and fine motor dexterity, was consistently in the moderately-to-severely impaired range. Behavioral problems were common in both sexes, including aggressivity, hyperactivity, and temper tantrums. Contrary to the few previous reports, we found no evidence of psychosis in any patients. In a subset of patients selected on the basis of no prior knowledge of behavioral problems, 1 of 16 patients (6%) had autism, as defined by the Autistic Diagnostic Interview--Revised (ADI-R) [Lord et al., 1994: J Autism Dev Disord 24:659-685]. Thus, the prevalence of autism in 18q- syndrome is probably no greater than that in other developmental disabilities with a similar level of cognitive impairment. In contrast to what has been believed since 18q- was first described 30 years ago, we found no relationship between chromosome deletion size and any measure of cognition or behavior; nor were there any correlations between any of these measures with the presence or absence of abnormalities on MRI or somatosensory-evoked potentials.

Adaptation, Psychological↗