Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ; 125: 104987, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34229014

ABSTRACT

In 2020, the European Commission up-classified pure cobalt metal to a Category 1B hazard, based primarily on data from rodent inhalation carcinogenicity studies of metallic cobalt. The European Commission review did not evaluate cobalt-containing alloys in medical devices, which have very different properties vs. pure cobalt metal and did not include a systematic epidemiologic review. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published, peer-reviewed epidemiologic studies evaluating the association between overall cancer risk and exposure to orthopedic implants containing cobalt alloys or cobalt particulates in occupational settings. Study-specific estimates were pooled using random-effects models. Analyses included 20 papers on orthopedic implants and 10 occupational cohort papers (~1 million individuals). The meta-analysis summary estimates (95% confidence intervals) for overall cancer risk were 1.00 (0.96-1.04) overall and 0.97 (0.94-1.00) among high-quality studies. Results were also similar in analyses stratified by type of exposure/data sources (occupational cohort, implant registry or database), comparators (general or implant population), cancer incidence or mortality, follow-up duration (latency period), and study precision. In conclusion, meta-analysis found no association between exposure to orthopedic implants containing cobalt alloys or cobalt particulates in occupational settings and overall cancer risk, including an analysis of studies directly comparing metal-on-metal vs. non-metal-on-metal implants.


Subject(s)
Alloys/chemistry , Cobalt/analysis , Equipment and Supplies , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Carcinogenesis , Humans , Joint Prosthesis , Neoplasms/mortality , Risk Assessment , Titanium/analysis
2.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 31(5): 1016-21, 2012 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22566441

ABSTRACT

Because the Affordable Care Act will expand health insurance to cover an estimated thirty-two million additional people, new approaches are needed to expand the primary care workforce. One possible solution is Grand-Aides®, who are health care professionals operating under the direct supervision of nurses, and who are trained and equipped to conduct telephone consultations or make primary care home visits to patients who might otherwise be seen in emergency departments and clinics. We conducted pilot tests with Grand-Aides in two pediatric Medicaid settings: an urban federally qualified health center in Houston, Texas, and a semi-rural emergency department in Harrisonburg, Virginia. We estimated that Grand-Aides and their supervisors averted 62 percent of drop-in visits at the Houston clinic and would have eliminated 74 percent of emergency department visits at the Virginia test site. We calculated the cost of the Grand-Aides program to be $16.88 per encounter. That compares with current Medicaid payments of $200 per clinic visit in Houston and $175 per emergency department visit in Harrisonburg. In addition to reducing health care costs, Grand-Aides have the potential to make a substantial impact in reducing congestion in primary care practices and emergency departments.


Subject(s)
Allied Health Personnel/economics , Allied Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Cost Savings/economics , Primary Health Care/economics , Health Services Accessibility , Health Workforce/organization & administration , House Calls , Humans , Pilot Projects , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Texas , Virginia
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL