Urban dengue is common in most countries of the Americas, but has been rare in the United States for more than half a century. In 1999 we investigated an outbreak of the disease that affected Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico, and Laredo, Texas, United States, contiguous cities that straddle the international border. The incidence of recent cases, indicated by immunoglobulin M antibody serosurvey, was higher in Nuevo Laredo, although the vector, Aedes aegypti, was more abundant in Laredo. Environmental factors that affect contact with mosquitoes, such as air-conditioning and human behavior, appear to account for this paradox. We conclude that the low prevalence of dengue in the United States is primarily due to economic, rather than climatic, factors.

Sustainability of health care organizations with the holistic approach discussed in this paper is an innovative and practical approach to quality improvement that merits further development.

Most clinical laboratories in the nation report severe difficulties in recruitment and retention of most types of personnel. Other important factors impacting this problem include work complexities, increased automation, and a graying workforce. As a further challenge, institutional needs for clinical laboratory personnel are expected to grow significantly in the next decade. This article examines the current situation of the clinical laboratory workforce. It analyzes the different types of personnel; the managerial, supervision, and line positions that are key for different types of laboratories; the job outlook and recent projections for different types of staff; and the current issues, trends, and challenges of the laboratory workforce. Laboratory managers need to take action with strategies suggested for overcoming these challenges. Most importantly, they need to become transformational leaders by developing effective staffing models, fostering healthy and productive work environments, and creating value with a strategic management culture and implementation of knowledge management.

Are there additional costs associated with achieving goals of sustainable health care? Will going green enhance or impede financial performance? These are questions that all health care managers should confront, yet there is little evidence to show that health care sustainability is affordable or profitable. This article considers what is presently known and suggests that health care managers use an assessment framework to determine whether they are ready to achieve health care sustainability.

Given the current operating climate, organizations are coming under pressure to develop and implement sustainability programs and projects, yet few managers truly understand what is meant by sustainability and its implications for managing organizations. This article examines the concept of sustainability and provides a broader definition of the term than going "green." Using a puzzle metaphor, the authors outline and explain the different components of sustainability and provide a checklist for achieving sustainability goals. In addition, resources such as guides and tools are reviewed and offered to assist managers in gaining more insight into the challenges and complexity of sustainability.

No abstract

No abstract

The debate over which health care providers are most capably meeting their responsibilities in serving the public's interest continues unabated, and the comparisons of not-for-profit (NFP) versus for-profit (FP) hospitals remain at the epicenter of the discussion. From the perspective of available factual information, which of the two sides to this debate is correct? This article is part II of a 2-part series on comparing and contrasting the performance records of NFP health care providers with their FP counterparts. Although it is demonstrated that both NFP and FP providers perform virtuous and selfless feats on behalf of America's public, it is also shown that both camps have been accused of being involved in potentially willful clinical and administrative missteps. Part I provided the background information (eg, legal differences, perspectives on social responsibility, and types of questionable and fraudulent behavior) required to adequately understand the scope of the comparison issue. Part II offers actual comparisons of the 2 organizational structures using several disparate factors such as specific organizational behaviors, approach to the health care priorities of cost and quality, and business-focused goals of profits, efficiency, and community benefit.