Relationships between food neophobia and food intake and preferences: Findings from a sample of New Zealand adults.

Food neophobia (FN) has been shown to be a strong influence on food preferences using primarily small data sets. This has limited the explanatory power of FN and the extent to which it can be related to other factors that influence food choice. To address these limitations, we collected Food Neophobia Scale data from 1167 adults from New Zealand over a 45-month period. Participants also completed a 112-item food preference questionnaire and a self-report 24 h, a 145 item food intake recall survey, and the Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ). As a way of providing a structure to the food intake and preference data, in each case the food items were condensed into patterns described in terms of the foods/beverages with highest factor loadings. We then determined the impact of season and participant age, gender, education and income on these factors, as well as the interaction of these variables with FN scores, divided into tertiles. FN was a strong influence on both intake frequency and preferences in the majority of the intake/preference factor patterns. When significant associations with FN were established, both frequency of intake and preference was lower among high FN individuals. Notably, the effect of FN on food preferences was evident on many commonplace foods making up the diet, suggesting that high FN individuals like food overall less than do those with lower degrees of FN. Seasonal effects in food intake were demonstrated, but with smaller impact for higher levels of FN. While associations between FN varied according to all demographic variables, these relationships varied as a function of the intake/preference patterns. Overall, the results suggest that FN is an important barrier to dietary change and addressing diet-related health problems.

[Patients with ICD-10 disorders F3 and F4 in psychiatric and psychosomatic in-patient units - who is treated where? : Allocation features from the PfAD study]. / Patienten mit Störungen nach ICD-10 F3 und F4 in Psychiatrie und Psychosomatik ­ wer wird wo behandelt? : Merkmale der Zuweisung aus der PfAD-Studie.

BACKGROUND: In Germany, in-patient treatment of patients with depressive, neurotic, anxiety, and somatoform disorders (ICD-10 F3, F4) is carried out in different settings in psychiatry and psychosomatics. Which patient characteristics determine referral to one or the other specialty is a crucial question in mental health policy and is a matter of ongoing controversy. However, comparative data on patient populations are widely lacking. METHODS: In the study of Treatment Pathways of Patients with Anxiety and Depression (PfAD study), a total of 320 patients with ICD-10 F3/F4 clinical diagnoses were consecutively recruited from four treatment settings (psychiatric depression ward, psychiatric crisis intervention ward, psychiatric day hospitals, or psychosomatic hospital units; 80 participants per setting) and investigated. RESULTS: In all treatment settings, patients with considerable severity of illness and chronicity were treated. Female gender, higher education, and higher income predicted referral to psychosomatic units; male gender, transfer from another hospital or emergency hospitalization, co-morbidity with a personality disorder, higher general psychiatric co-morbidity, and danger to self at admission predicted referral to psychiatric unit. Patients in psychosomatic units had neither more psychosomatic disorders nor more somatic problems. DISCUSSION: There is considerable overlap between the clientele of psychiatric and psychosomatic units. Referral and allocation appears to be determined by aspects of severity and social status.

Implementation of pre-seasonal sublingual immunotherapy with a five-grass pollen tablet during optimal dosage assessment.

BACKGROUND: The optimal dose (300IR) of a five-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablet in terms of efficacy was previously demonstrated from the first pollen season. OBJECTIVE: Here, we aim to confirm whether this dose remained optimal during the peak of the pollen season by assessing the efficacy and quality of life data. METHODS: A total of 628 subjects with grass pollen rhinoconjunctivitis were randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre, pan-European trial. Subjects received once-daily tablets (Stallergenes, Antony, France) of 100IR, 300IR, 500IR or placebo, starting 4 months before and throughout the 2005 grass pollen season. The pollen season was defined as the first day of 3 consecutive days with a grass pollen count above 30 grains/m(3) of air, recorded using Hirst-type volumetric pollen traps, to the last day before 3 consecutive days with a pollen count below 30 grains/m(3). RESULTS: The grass pollen season lasted an average of 30 days, with a peak of 12 days. The mean treatment duration before the grass pollen season was similar in the four treatment groups (121.4+/-31.1 to 128.6+/-15.4 days in the safety population). Both the 300IR and 500IR groups had highly significant improvements in Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score (RTSS) vs. placebo at the peak pollen season (P=0.0005 and 0.0014, respectively), which agreed with improvements in RTSS in the primary evaluations. The average RTSS scores were slightly elevated during the peak pollen season in all treatment groups. The overall Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire score confirmed the optimal dosage 300IR at peak (P<0.0001) and at the end (P< or =0.0031) of the pollen season. All doses were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: At the peak pollen season, the efficacy and quality of life data for both 300IR and 500IR groups was significantly improved vs. the placebo group. These results confirm the conclusions of the primary evaluations and validate the use of 300IR tablets for clinical practice.

Cost savings and health losses from reducing inappropriate admissions to a department of internal medicine.

OBJECTIVES: Inappropriate hospital admissions are commonly believed to represent a potential for significant cost reductions. However, this presumes that these patients can be identified before the hospital stay. The present study aimed to investigate to what extent this is possible. METHODS: Consecutive admissions to a department of internal medicine were assessed by two expert panels. One panel predicted the appropriateness of the stays from the information available at admission, while final judgments of appropriateness were made after discharge by the other. RESULTS: The panels correctly classified 88% of the appropriate and 27% of the inappropriate admissions. If the elective admissions predicted to be inappropriate had been excluded, 9% of the costs would have been saved, and 5% of the gain in quality-adjusted life-years lost. The corresponding results for emergency admissions were 14% and 18%. CONCLUSIONS: The savings obtained by excluding admissions predicted to be inappropriate were small relative to the health losses. Programs for reducing inappropriate health care should not be implemented without investigating their effects on both health outcomes and costs.

The cost of inappropriate admissions: a study of health benefits and resource utilization in a department of internal medicine.

OBJECTIVES: High rates of inappropriate hospital admissions have been found in numerous studies, suggesting that a high percentage of hospital resources are, in effect, wasted. The degree to which this is true depends on how costly inappropriate admissions are compared to other admissions. This study aimed to estimate both the percentage and cost of inappropriate admissions. SETTING: Department of internal medicine at a teaching hospital. SUBJECTS: Consecutively admitted patients during a six-week study period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessments of inappropriateness were based on estimates of health benefit and necessary care level. These estimates were made by expert panels using a structured consensus method. Health benefit was estimated as gain in quality-adjusted life years, or degree of short-term improvement in quality of life during or shortly after the hospital stay. The direct costs to the hospital of each stay were estimated by allocating the costs of labour, 'hotel' and overhead according to length of stay and adding to this the cost of ancillary resources used by each individual patient. RESULTS: A total of 422 admissions were included. The 102 (24%) judged to be inappropriate had a lower mean cost (US$ 2532) than the other 320 (US$ 5800) (difference 3268; 95% confidence interval 1025-5511). The inappropriate admissions accounted for 12% of the total costs. CONCLUSIONS: Denying care for inappropriate admissions does not generate cost reductions of the same magnitude. Policy makers should be cautious in projecting the cost savings potential of excluding inappropriate admissions.

Assessing health benefit from hospitalization. Agreement between expert panels.

Agreement between two expert panels in assessing gain in life expectancy and quality of life from unselected stays in a department of internal medicine was investigated. Weighted kappa statistics of 0.45 for gain in life expectancy and 0.63 for gain in quality of life were found.

[Diagnosis and treatment of lymphomas. Retrospective quality assessment of a 10-year material]. / Lymfomdiagnostikk og behandling. Retrospektiv kvalitetsvurdering av et tiårsmateriale.

We have performed a quality assessment of staging and treatment of 64 patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma treated at the Department of Internal Medicine, Nordland Central Hospital from 1982 to 1991. The assessment was based on defined quality criteria. Journal records of patient history, physical examination and stage were unsatisfactory. Histological examinations, use of laboratory tests and X-ray examinations were appropriate. The choice of chemotherapy for high grade malignancy was adequate, average relative dose-intensity was low. Low utilization of radiotherapy could be explained in most cases by individual patient factors. 5-years disease-specific survival was 54% for all patients and 70% for those presenting with localized disease.