PubMed · 10315065
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J E Haas. Update: ACT's citizen CPR program.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10315065/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: While sedation is necessary for much pediatric imaging, there are new alternatives that may help patients hold still without medication. OBJECTIVE: We examined the effect of an audio/visual system consisting of video goggles and earphones on the need for sedation during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All MRI examinations from May 1999 to October 1999 performed after installation of the MRVision 2000 (Resonance Technology, Inc.) were compared to the same 6-month period in 1998. Imaging and sedation protocols remained constant. Data collected included: patient age, type of examination, use of intravenous contrast enhancement, and need for sedation. The average supply charge and nursing cost per sedated patient were calculated. RESULTS: The 955 patients from 1998 and 1,112 patients from 1999 were similar in demographics and examination distribution. There was an overall reduction in the percent of patients requiring sedation in the group using the video goggle system from 49 to 40% (P < 0.001). There was no significant change for 0-2 years (P = 0.805), but there was a reduction from 53 to 40% for age 3-10 years (P < 0.001) and 16 to 8% for those older than 10 years (P < 0.001). There was a 17% decrease in MRI room time for those patients whose examinations could be performed without sedation. Sedation costs per patient were $80 for nursing and $29 for supplies. CONCLUSION: The use of this video system reduced the number of children requiring sedation for MRI examination by 18%. In addition to reducing patient risk, this can potentially reduce cost.
There is a variety of pressures on pharmacology teachers to replace real laboratory practicals with simulations but do they help students achieve the required learning objectives? In this article, the marks obtained by students in a variety of assessments using 'wet' or simulated practicals are analysed. Poorer performance in practical write-ups by students doing 'wet' practicals compared with those doing simulations can be explained by the quality of the data that the students obtain. In examinations, students perform equally well except with questions that are related to the experimental details of 'wet' practicals; students taught using such 'wet' practicals perform better in response to these questions.
The Edmonton Labeled Visual Information System (ELVIS) is a novel method of documenting clinical information because it is a pictorial method of representing cancer burden and treatment. This randomized, crossover, multiperiod trial involved 16 physicians who each reviewed two ELVIS and two control (text) cancer patient cases (total 32 ELVIS and 32 text cases). Short-answer questionnaires were administered immediately and 18--24 hours following. Mean (+/- SD) recall of basic disease and treatment information was superior immediately following the ELVIS cases (83% +/- 14%) versus text cases (60% +/- 14%, P < 0.0001) and 18--24 hours later (ELVIS cases 65% +/- 21% versus text cases 43% +/- 21%, P < 0.0001). Mean (+/- SD) time required to memorize information was reduced in the ELVIS cases (4 +/- 2 min) versus text cases (13 +/- 6 min, P < 0.0001). Ratings of overall physician preference strongly favored the ELVIS over text. The data indicate that ELVIS aids the process of learning complex cancer patient histories.