PubMed · 15575633
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Paul Fulbrook. Realizing advanced nursing practice through reflection.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1362-1017.2004.00089.x
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) was given for many years in order to relieve menopausal symptoms and was used for as long as symptom control was necessary. The Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS) and Women's Health Initiative (WHI) studies showed that HRT should not be given for primary or secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD). However, what about those patients during acute myocardial infarction who are already taking HRT? Is the 'don't stop don't start' rule still true? A 58-year-old white female, on HRT was admitted with acute myocardial infarction (MI). We tried to answer the above questions in light of the new information:Based on current evidence available from HERS and WHI trials, it is not advisable to initiate HRT in women with established CHD for the sole purpose of preventing first or recurring coronary events. A statement by the American Heart Association recommends that the decision to continue or stop HRT in women with CV disease should be based on established benefits and risks, taking patients preference into account. The WHI study did not change this policy in the acute phase. In most cases, we believe HRT should be continued for some period (our decision for 3 months long was arbitrary), and discontinued gradually. We believe that this should be the policy until we have a double-blind placebo-control data to revise.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Hazard zones associated with LNG handling activities have been a major point of contention in recent terminal development applications. Debate has reflected primarily worst case scenarios and discussion of these. This paper presents results from a maximum credible event approach. A comparison of results from several models either run by the authors or reported in the literature is presented. While larger scale experimental trials will be necessary to reduce the uncertainty, in the interim a set of base cases are suggested covering both existing trials and credible and worst case events is proposed. This can assist users to assess the degree of conservatism present in quoted modeling approaches and model selections.