PubMed · 15669401
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Joni M Richmond. The active ingredient.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15669401/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Currently, there is a "divide" between cancer survivorship initiatives and minority participation. The level of participation is nearly nonexistent in many cancer support and control initiatives. Cancer survivorship resources that facilitate access to treatment, psychosocial interventions, clinical trials, and research are key components to eliminating this divide. Differences in cancer results among minority populations are caused by several factors, including biologic reactions to environmental activities, socioeconomic status, perceived beliefs and notions of medical professionals, a lack of resources to participate in cancer support groups, and having personal contact with cancer survivors. Health professionals, advocates, and researchers hold the key to opening more opportunities for the improvement of cancer survivorship among minorities. The belief that "one size fits all" is unrealistic. These beliefs can influence participation in innovative clinical trials, decisions about treatment, emotional responses, and social support relationships. To help ensure participation in these programs, researchers and health workers must understand the role of social and psychosocial implications and results of the assessment, strategies, and sustainability that must be included in the development stage of any cancer support and survivorship initiatives. For this article, the authors examined mechanisms that can be used by cancer-control researchers and program staff to limit the divide between cancer survivorship initiatives and minority participation. They identified three strategies that must be used to address this divide effectively: the inclusion of minorities in clinical trials, intervention studies, treatment, and research programs; the development of culturally sensitive environments; and the ability to sustain minority participation. In summary, cancer survivorship includes many components that are developed individually and collectively to formulate sound strategies for including minorities in cancer-control initiatives. These programs should go beyond basic support groups and should include research studies, clinical trials, and alternative treatments for increasing cancer survival rates and quality of life among minorities. The divide can be addressed only through a proactive initiative that brings cancer survivorship initiatives and minority communities together in full partnership.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential effect of educational intervention on episiotomy practice. STUDY DESIGN: A survey of the attitude of obstetrical caregivers toward episiotomy was conducted among obstetricians and midwives in the three public hospitals in Haifa. Data regarding episiotomy rates was collected for the years 2001-2003. At the beginning of 2002, lectures on the risks and benefits of episiotomy were given in two hospitals. Episiotomy rates before and after the lecture were compared. RESULTS: A significant and lasting reduction in episiotomy rates was observed in the two hospitals where lectures were given. There were no clinically significant and consistent changes in the episiotomy practices in the third hospital. CONCLUSION: Education may play an important role in changing common medical practices, as in episiotomy. It was clearly shown that our beliefs are not always up to date. We call for periodic reassessment of all medical procedures, as common and accepted as they are.
BACKGROUND: The general practitioner in Norway is expected to ensure equity and effectiveness through fair rationing. At the same time, due to recent reforms of the Norwegian health care sector, both the role of economic incentives and patient autonomy have been strengthened. Studies indicate that modern general practitioners, both in Norway and in other countries are uncomfortable with the gatekeeper role, but there is little knowledge about how general practitioners experience rationing in practice. METHODS: Through focus group interviews with Norwegian general practitioners, we explore physicians' attitudes toward factors of influence on medical decision making and how rationing dilemmas are experienced in everyday practice. RESULTS: Four major concerns appeared in the group discussions: The obligation to ration health care, professional autonomy, patient autonomy, and competition. A central finding was that the physicians find rationing difficult because saying no in face to face relations often is felt uncomfortable and in conflict with other important objectives for the general practitioner. CONCLUSION: It is important to understand the association between using economic incentives in the management of health care, increasing patient autonomy, and the willingness among physicians to contribute to efficient, fair and legitimate resource allocation.