Optimization of a Mass Trapping Method against the Striped Cucumber Beetle Acalymma vittatum in Organic Cucurbit Fields.

The striped cucumber beetle (SCB) Acalymma vittatum (F.) (Coleptera: Chrysomelidae) is a prime problem in North American cucurbit crops. While certain chemical pesticides efficiently control SCB in conventional cucurbit fields, alternative solutions are required due to the ever-evolving regulations on pesticides. For organic producers, very few control methods exist. A novel mass trapping method demonstrates the potential of controlling SCBs using floral-based semiochemical baited traps in cucurbit crops. The goals of this study were to (1) determine whether baited traps capture more SCBs than unbaited ones, and (2) optimize the trapping method by comparing different trap types and different commercially available attractants to maximize SCB captures while minimizing non-target species captures. The results of a first experiment showed that baited traps captured significantly more SCBs than unbaited ones. Baited traps also captured significantly more bees and hoverflies than unbaited ones. In a second experiment these unwanted captures were drastically reduced by using traps with ten 4 mm in diameter holes per side. Finally, a third experiment demonstrated that the attractant 40CT313 was the most efficient at capturing SCB compared to other tested lures. Overall, the optimized mass trapping technique demonstrated a potential to effectively control SCB populations in organic cucurbit crops.

Usage and accuracy of medication data from nationwide health information exchange in Quebec, Canada.

Objective: (1) To describe the usage of medication data from the Health Information Exchange (HIE) at the health care system level in the province of Quebec; (2) To assess the accuracy of the medication list obtained from the HIE. Methods: A descriptive study was conducted utilizing usage data obtained from the Ministry of Health at the individual provider level from January 1 to December 31, 2015. Usage patterns by role, type of site, and tool used to access the HIE were investigated. The list of medications of 111 high risk patients arriving at the emergency department of an academic healthcare center was obtained from the HIE and compared with the list obtained through the medication reconciliation process. Results: There were 31 022 distinct users accessing the HIE 11 085 653 times in 2015. The vast majority of pharmacists and general practitioners accessed it, compared to a minority of specialists and nurses. The top 1% of users was responsible of 19% of access. Also, 63% of the access was made using the Viewer application, while using a certified electronic medical record application seemed to facilitate usage. Among 111 patients, 71 (64%) had at least one discrepancy between the medication list obtained from the HIE and the reference list. Conclusions: Early adopters were mostly in primary care settings, and were accessing it more frequently when using a certified electronic medical record. Further work is needed to investigate how to resolve accuracy issues with the medication list and how certain tools provide different features.

Improving patient safety and efficiency of medication reconciliation through the development and adoption of a computer-assisted tool with automated electronic integration of population-based community drug data: the RightRx project.

Background and Objective: Many countries require hospitals to implement medication reconciliation for accreditation, but the process is resource-intensive, thus adherence is poor. We report on the impact of prepopulating and aligning community and hospital drug lists with data from population-based and hospital-based drug information systems to reduce workload and enhance adoption and use of an e-medication reconciliation application, RightRx. Methods: The prototype e-medical reconciliation web-based software was developed for a cluster-randomized trial at the McGill University Health Centre. User-centered design and agile development processes were used to develop features intended to enhance adoption, safety, and efficiency. RightRx was implemented in medical and surgical wards, with support and training provided by unit champions and field staff. The time spent per professional using RightRx was measured, as well as the medication reconciliation completion rates in the intervention and control units during the first 20 months of the trial. Results: Users identified required modifications to the application, including the need for dose-based prescribing, the role of the discharge physician in prescribing community-based medication, and access to the rationale for medication decisions made during hospitalization. In the intervention units, both physicians and pharmacists were involved in discharge reconciliation, for 96.1% and 71.9% of patients, respectively. Medication reconciliation was completed for 80.7% (surgery) to 96.0% (medicine) of patients in the intervention units, and 0.7% (surgery) to 82.7% of patients in the control units. The odds of completing medication reconciliation were 9 times greater in the intervention compared to control units (odds ratio: 9.0, 95% confidence interval, 7.4-10.9, P < .0001) after adjusting for differences in patient characteristics. Conclusion: High rates of medication reconciliation completion were achieved with automated prepopulation and alignment of community and hospital medication lists.