No abstract

No abstract

Background: Our objective was to identify published models of coordination between entities funding or delivering health services in humanitarian crises, whether the coordination took place during or after the crises.Methods: We included reports describing models of coordination in sufficient detail to allow reproducibility. We also included reports describing implementation of identified models, as case studies. We searched Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the WHO Global Health Library. We also searched websites of relevant organizations. We followed standard systematic review methodology.Results: Our search captured 14,309 citations. The screening process identified 34 eligible papers describing five models of coordination of delivering health services: the “Cluster Approach” (with 16 case studies), the 4Ws “Who is Where, When, doing What” mapping tool (with four case studies), the “Sphere Project” (with two case studies), the “5x5” model (with one case study), and the “model of information coordination” (with one case study). The 4Ws and the 5x5 focus on coordination of services for mental health, the remaining models do not focus on a specific health topic. The Cluster approach appears to be the most widely used. One case study was a mixed implementation of the Cluster approach and the Sphere model. We identified no model of coordination for funding of health service.Conclusion: This systematic review identified five proposed coordination models that have been implemented by entities funding or delivering health service in humanitarian crises. There is a need to compare the effect of these different models on outcomes such as availability of and access to health services.

No abstract

Background and Aims Water filling during colonoscopy improves several colonoscopy outcomes. We evaluated an anecdotal observation that room temperature water filling during colonoscope insertion results in mucus production in the left colon, which may impair mucosal visualization during withdrawal. Methods We performed 55 colonoscopies with either water or saline filling during insertion, and video recorded the examinations. Three blinded observers scored the amount of mucus visible on the video recordings. Results Twenty-nine patients had water filling and 26 patients had saline filling during insertion. Demographic features, procedure indications, volume of infused fluid, and insertion time to the cecum were similar in both groups. All 3 blinded observers rated the mucus as greater after water filling compared to saline (median 3 out of 5 vs. 1 out of 5, p < 0.001). Kappa value for interobserver agreement was 0.364 (p < 0.001). Conclusion Room temperature water filling is associated with mucus production by the rectosigmoid colon, requiring additional cleansing during withdrawal.