The purpose of the study was to examine differences between documented and undocumented Latino immigrants in the prevalence of three immigration-related challenges (separation from family, traditionality, and language difficulties), which were made more severe after the passage of restrictive immigration legislation in 1996. Specifically, the study sought to determine the combined and unique associations of legal status, the three immigration-related challenges listed above, and fear of deportation to acculturative stress related to family and other social contexts. Participants in the study consisted of 416 documented and undocumented Mexican and Central American immigrants living in two major cities in Texas. The Hispanic Stress Inventory–Immigrant form was used to assess acculturative stress in the sample. Results indicated that although undocumented immigrants reported higher levels of the immigration challenges of separation from family, traditionality, and language difficulties than documented immigrants, both groups reported similar levels of fear of deportation. Results also indicated that the immigration challenges and undocumented status were uniquely associated with extrafamilial acculturative stress but not with intrafamilial acculturative stress. Only fear of deportation emerged as a unique predictor of both extrafamililal and intrafamilial acculturative stress.

No abstract

Haemophilia B is a rare X-linked genetic deficiency of coagulation factor IX (FIX) that, if untreated, can cause recurrent and disabling bleeding, potentially leading to severe arthropathy and/or life-threatening haemorrhage. Recent decades have brought significant improvements in haemophilia B management, including the advent of recombinant FIX and extended half-life FIX. This therapeutic landscape continues to evolve with several non-factor replacement therapies and gene therapies under investigation. Given the rarity of haemophilia B, the evidence base and clinical experience on which to establish clinical guidelines are relatively sparse and are further challenged by features that are distinct from haemophilia A, precluding extrapolation of existing haemophilia A guidelines. Due to the paucity of formal haemophilia B-specific clinical guidance, an international Author Group was convened to develop a clinical practice framework. The group comprised 15 haematology specialists from Europe, Australia, Japan, Latin America and North America, covering adult and paediatric haematology, laboratory medicine and biomedical science. A hybrid approach combining a systematic review of haemophilia B literature with discussion of clinical experience utilized a modified Delphi format to develop a comprehensive set of clinical recommendations. This approach resulted in 29 recommendations for the clinical management of haemophilia B across five topics, including product treatment choice, therapeutic agent laboratory monitoring, pharmacokinetics considerations, inhibitor management and preparing for gene therapy. It is anticipated that this clinical practice framework will complement existing guidelines in the management of people with haemophilia B in routine clinical practice and could be adapted and applied across different regions and countries.

No abstract

Abstract. Background: Reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a time-dependent intervention that can reduce infarct-related morbidity and mortality. Out-of-hospital patient delay from symptom onset until emergency department (ED) presentation may reduce the expected benefit of reperfusion therapy. Objective: To determine the impact of a community educational intervention to reduce patient delay time on the use of reperfusion therapy for AMI. Methods: This was a randomized, controlled community-based trial to enhance patient recognition of AMI symptoms and encourage early ED presentation with resultant increased reperfusion therapy rates for AMI. The study took place in 44 hospitals in 20 pair-matched communities in five U.S. geographic regions. Eligible study subjects were noninstitutionalized patients without chest injury (aged Ն30 years) who were admitted to participating hospitals and who received a hospital discharge diagnosis of AMI (ICD 410); n = 4,885. For outcome assessment, patients were excluded if they were without survival data (n = 402), enrolled in thrombolytic trials (n = 61), receiving reperfusion therapy >12 hours after ED arrival (n = 628), or missing symptom onset or reperfusion times (n = 781). The applied intervention was an educational program targeting community organizations and the general public, high-risk patients, and health professionals in target communities. The primary outcome was a change in the proportion of AMI patients receiving early reperfusion therapy (i.e., within one hour of ED arrival or within six hours of symptom onset). Trends in reperfusion therapy rates were determined after adjustment for patient demographics, presenting blood pressure, cardiac history, and insurance status. Four-month baseline was compared with the 18-month intervention period. Results: Of 3,013 selected AMI patients, 40% received reperfusion therapy. Eighteen percent received therapy within one hour of ED arrival (46% of treated patients), and 32% within six hours of symptom onset (80% of treated patients). No significant difference in the trends in reperfusion therapy rates was attributable to the intervention, although increases in early reperfusion therapy rates were noted during the first six months of the intervention. A significant association of early reperfusion therapy use with ambulance use was identified. Conclusions: Community-wide educational efforts to enhance patient response to AMI symptoms may not translate into sustained changes in reperfusion practices. However, an increased odds for early reperfusion therapy use during the initiation of the intervention and the association of early therapy with ambulance use suggest that reperfusion therapy rates can be enhanced.

BackgroundPoint-of-care tests (POCTs) are increasingly used in family medicine clinics in the United States. While the diagnostics industry predicts significant growth in the number and scope of POCTs deployed, little is known about clinic-level attitudes towards implementation of these tests. We aimed to explore attitudes of primary care providers, laboratory and clinic administrative/support staff to identify barriers and facilitators to use of POCTs in family medicine.MethodsSeven focus groups and four semi-structured interviews were conducted with a total of 52 clinic staff from three family medicine clinics in two US states. Qualitative data from this exploratory study was analyzed using the constant comparison method.ResultsFive themes were identified which included the impact of POCTs on clinical decision-making; perceived inaccuracy of POCTs; impact of POCTs on staff and workflow; perceived patient experience and patient-provider relationship, and issues related to cost, regulation and quality control. Overall, there were mixed attitudes towards use of POCTs. Participants believed the added data provided by POCT may facilitate prompt clinical management, diagnostic certainty and patient-provider communication.Perceived barriers included inaccuracy of POCT, shortage of clinic staff to support more testing, and uncertainty about their cost-effectiveness.ConclusionsThe potential benefits of using POCTs in family medicine clinics are countered by several barriers. Clinical utility of many POCTs will depend on the extent to which these barriers are addressed. Engagement between clinical researchers, industry, health insurers and the primary care community is important to ensure that POCTs align with clinic and patient needs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0549-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

No abstract