Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Nutrients ; 13(11)2021 Nov 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34836250

RESUMO

Food insecurity (FI) is defined as "the limited or uncertain access to adequate food." One root cause of FI is living in a food desert. FI rates among people with cystic fibrosis (CF) are higher than the general United States (US) population. There is limited data on the association between food deserts and CF health outcomes. We conducted a retrospective review of people with CF under 18 years of age at a single pediatric CF center from January to December 2019 using demographic information and CF health parameters. Using a Geographic Information System, we conducted a spatial overlay analysis at the census tract level using the 2015 Food Access Research Atlas to assess the association between food deserts and CF health outcomes. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis and adjusted for clinical covariates and demographic covariates, using the Child Opportunity Index (COI) to calculate odds ratios (OR) with confidence intervals (CI) for each health outcome. People with CF living in food deserts and the surrounding regions had lower body mass index/weight-for-length (OR 3.18, 95% CI: 1.01, 9.40, p ≤ 0.05 (food desert); OR 4.41, 95% CI: 1.60, 12.14, p ≤ 0.05 (600 ft buffer zone); OR 2.83, 95% CI: 1.18, 6.76, p ≤ 0.05 (1200 ft buffer zone)). Food deserts and their surrounding regions impact pediatric CF outcomes independent of COI. Providers should routinely screen for FI and proximity to food deserts. Interventions are essential to increase access to healthy and affordable food.


Assuntos
Fibrose Cística , Desertos Alimentares , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Adolescente , Índice de Massa Corporal , Setor Censitário , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Alimentos , Insegurança Alimentar , Nível de Saúde , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Análise Espacial , Estados Unidos , United States Department of Agriculture
2.
AEM Educ Train ; 5(4): e10643, 2021 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34568713

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to survey pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) leaders and fellows regarding point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) training in PEM fellowship programs, including teaching methods, training requirements, and applications taught. Secondary objectives were to compare fellows' and program leaders' perceptions of fellow POCUS competency and training barriers. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey of U.S. PEM fellows and fellowship program leaders of the 78 fellowship programs using two online group-specific surveys exploring five domains: program demographics; training strategies and requirements; perceived competency; barriers, strengths, and weaknesses of POCUS training; and POCUS satisfaction. RESULTS: Eighty-three percent (65/78) of programs and 53% (298/558) of fellows responded. All participating PEM fellowship programs included POCUS training in their curriculum. Among the 65 programs, 97% of programs and 92% of programs utilized didactics and supervised scanning shifts as educational techniques, respectively. Sixty percent of programs integrated numerical benchmarks and 49% of programs incorporated real-time, hands-on demonstration as training requirements. Of the 19 POCUS applications deemed in the literature as core requirements for fellows, at least 75% of the 298 fellows reported training in 13 of those applications. Although less than half of fellows endorsed competency for identifying intussusception, ultrasound-guided pericardiocentesis, and transvaginal pregnancy evaluation, a higher proportion of leaders reported fellows as competent for these applications (40% vs. 68%, p ≤ 0.001; 21% vs. 39%, p = 0.003; and 21% vs. 43%, p ≤ 0.001). Forty-six percent of fellows endorsed a lack of PEM POCUS evidence as a training barrier compared to 31% of leaders (p = 0.02), and 39% of leaders endorsed a lack of local financial support as a training barrier compared to 23% of fellows (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although most PEM fellowship programs provide POCUS training, there is variation in content and requirements. Training does conform to many of the expert recommended guidelines; however, there are some discrepancies and perceived barriers to POCUS training remain.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA