ercury has been used commercially and medically for centuries. In the past it was a common constituent of many medications. It is still used in hospitals in thermometers and blood-pressure cuffs and commercially in batteries, switches, and fluorescent light bulbs. Large quantities of metallic mercury are employed as electrodes in the electrolytic production of chlorine and sodium hydroxide from saline. These uses still give rise to accidental and occupational exposures. 1 Today, however, exposure of the general population comes from three major sources: fish consumption, dental amalgams, and vaccines. Each has its own characteristic form of mercury and distinctive toxicologic profile and clinical symptoms. Dental amalgams emit mercury vapor that is inhaled and absorbed into the bloodstream. Dentists and anyone with an amalgam filling are exposed to this form of mercury. Liquid metallic mercury (quicksilver) still finds its way into homes, causing a risk of poisoning from the vapor and creating major cleanup costs. Humans are also exposed to two distinct but related organic forms, methyl mercury (CH 3 Hg + ) and ethyl mercury (CH 3 CH 2 Hg + ). Fish are the main if not the only source of methyl mercury, since it is no longer used as a fungicide. In many countries, babies are exposed to ethyl mercury through vaccination, since this form is the active ingredient of the preservative thimerosal used in vaccines. Whereas removal of certain forms of mercury, such as that in blood-pressure cuffs, will not cause increased health risks, removal of each of the three major sources described in this article entails health risks and thus poses a dilemma to the health professional. Exposure to mercury from dental amalgams and fish consumption has been a concern for decades, but the possible risk associated with thimerosal is a much newer concern. These fears have been heightened by a recent recommendation by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that the allowable or safe daily intake of methyl mercury be reduced from 0.5 µg of mercury per kilogram of body weight per day, the threshold established by the World Health Organization in 1978, 2 to 0.1 µg of mercury per kilogram per day. 3 Table 1 summarizes the clinical toxicologic features of mercury vapor and methyl and ethyl mercury. It also includes data on inorganic divalent mercury, since this is believed to be the toxic species produced in tissues after inhalation of the vapor. 5 It is also responsible for kidney damage after exposure to ethyl mercury, since ethyl mercury is rapidly converted to the inorganic form. 13 Inorganic mercury as both mercuric and mercurous salts was also the chief cause of acrodynia, a childhood disease that is now mainly of historical interest. 14 The clinical symptoms of acrodynia consist of painful, red, swollen fingers and toes in association with photophobia, irritability, asthenia, and hypertension. It is believed to be a hypersensitivity reaction. m

/pdf/the-toxicology-of-mercury-current-exposures-and-clinical-3hdhs96jay.pdf

The toxicology of mercury--current exposures and clinical manifestations.

The guideline is intended for use by healthcare providers who care for adult and pediatric patients with group A streptococcal pharyngitis. The guideline updates the 2002 Infectious Diseases Society of America guideline and discusses diagnosis and management, and recommendations are provided regarding antibiotic choices and dosing. Penicillin or amoxicillin remain the treatments of choice, and recommendations are made for the penicillin-allergic patient, which now include clindamycin.

/pdf/clinical-practice-guideline-for-the-diagnosis-and-management-51g80uc39j.pdf

Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of group A streptococcal pharyngitis: 2012 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Objective. Tonsillectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures in the United States, with more than 530 000 pr o- cedures performed annually in children younger than 15 years. Tonsillectomy is defined as a surgical procedure performed with or without adenoidectomy that completely removes the tonsil including its capsule by dissecting the peritonsil- lar space between the tonsil capsule and the muscular wall. Depending on the context in which it is used, it may indicate tonsillectomy with adenoidectomy, especially in relation to sleep-disordered breathing. This guideline provides evidence- based recommendations on the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care and management of children 1 to 18 years old under consideration for tonsillectomy. In addition, this guideline is intended for all clinicians in any setting who interact with children 1 to 18 years of age who may be candi- dates for tonsillectomy. Purpose. The primary purpose of this guideline is to provide clinicians with evidence-based guidance in identifying children who are the best candidates for tonsillectomy. Secondary objectives are to optimize the perioperative management of children undergoing tonsillectomy, emphasize the need for evaluation and intervention in special populations, improve counseling and education of families of children who are con- sidering tonsillectomy for their child, highlight the manage- ment options for patients with modifying factors, and reduce inappropriate or unnecessary variations in care. Results. The panel made a strong recommendation that clinicians should administer a single, intraoperative dose of intravenous dexamethasone to children undergoing tonsillectomy. The panel made a strong recommendation against clinicians routinely admin- istering or prescribing perioperative antibiotics to children undergoing tonsillectomy. The panel made recommendations for

/pdf/clinical-practice-guideline-tonsillectomy-in-children-4fuvuegikz.pdf

Clinical practice guideline: tonsillectomy in children.

Results There were 146 cases of IPD, 89 before and 57 after PCV7 introduction. Isolated bacteremia occurred in 94 cases (64%), pneumonia in 27 (18%), meningitis in 22 (15%), and septic arthritis and/or osteomyelitis in 3 (2%). Mean rates of IPD for infants aged 0 to 90 days decreased 40% from 11.8 (95% confidence interval (CI), 9.6-14.5) to 7.2 (95% CI, 5.6-9.4; P=.004) per 100000 live births following PCV7 introduction. Among black infants, mean rates of IPD decreased significantly from 17.1 (95% CI, 11.9-24.6) to 5.3 (95% CI, 2.8-10.1; P=.001) per 100000 live births, with a nonsignificant decrease from 9.6 (95% CI, 7.3-12.7) to 6.8 (95% CI, 4.9-9.4) per 100000 live births for white infants. Rates of PCV7-serotype isolates decreased sig- nificantly from 7.3 (95% CI, 5.3-10.1) to 2.4 (95% CI, 1.6-3.8; P.001) per 100000 live births, while rates of non-PCV7 serotypes remained stable (P=.55). Conclusions Since PCV7 introduction, rates of IPD in young infants have de- creased significantly, providing evidence that vaccinating children aged 2 to 23 months has led to changes in pneumococcal carriage in infants too young to receive PCV7. With a significant decrease in rates of IPD among black infants, the previous racial difference has been eliminated.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/202668/JOC60037.pdf

Invasive pneumococcal disease among infants before and after introduction of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine.

Background
There is considerable interest in the effectiveness of financial incentives in the delivery of health care. Incentives may be used in an attempt to increase the use of evidence-based treatments among healthcare professionals or to stimulate health professionals to change their clinical behaviour with respect to preventive, diagnostic and treatment decisions, or both. Financial incentives are an extrinsic source of motivation and exist when an individual can expect a monetary transfer which is made conditional on acting in a particular way. Since there are numerous reviews performed within the healthcare area describing the effects of various types of financial incentives, it is important to summarise the effectiveness of these in an overview to discern which are most effective in changing health professionals' behaviour and patient outcomes.

Objectives
To conduct an overview of systematic reviews that evaluates the impact of financial incentives on healthcare professional behaviour and patient outcomes.

Methods
We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) (The Cochrane Library); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE); TRIP; MEDLINE; EMBASE; Science Citation Index; Social Science Citation Index; NHS EED; HEED; EconLit; and Program in Policy Decision-Making (PPd) (from their inception dates up to January 2010). We searched the reference lists of all included reviews and carried out a citation search of those papers which cited studies included in the review. We included both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), interrupted time series (ITSs) and controlled before and after studies (CBAs) that evaluated the effects of financial incentives on professional practice and patient outcomes, and that reported numerical results of the included individual studies. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of each review according to the AMSTAR criteria. We included systematic reviews of studies evaluating the effectiveness of any type of financial incentive. We grouped financial incentives into five groups: payment for working for a specified time period; payment for each service, episode or visit; payment for providing care for a patient or specific population; payment for providing a pre-specified level or providing a change in activity or quality of care; and mixed or other systems. We summarised data using vote counting.

Main results
We identified four reviews reporting on 32 studies. Two reviews scored 7 on the AMSTAR criteria (moderate, score 5 to 7, quality) and two scored 9 (high, score 8 to 11, quality). The reported quality of the included studies was, by a variety of methods, low to moderate. Payment for working for a specified time period was generally ineffective, improving 3/11 outcomes from one study reported in one review. Payment for each service, episode or visit was generally effective, improving 7/10 outcomes from five studies reported in three reviews; payment for providing care for a patient or specific population was generally effective, improving 48/69 outcomes from 13 studies reported in two reviews; payment for providing a pre-specified level or providing a change in activity or quality of care was generally effective, improving 17/20 reported outcomes from 10 studies reported in two reviews; and mixed and other systems were of mixed effectiveness, improving 20/31 reported outcomes from seven studies reported in three reviews. When looking at the effect of financial incentives overall across categories of outcomes, they were of mixed effectiveness on consultation or visit rates (improving 10/17 outcomes from three studies in two reviews); generally effective in improving processes of care (improving 41/57 outcomes from 19 studies in three reviews); generally effective in improving referrals and admissions (improving 11/16 outcomes from 11 studies in four reviews); generally ineffective in improving compliance with guidelines outcomes (improving 5/17 outcomes from five studies in two reviews); and generally effective in improving prescribing costs outcomes (improving 28/34 outcomes from 10 studies in one review).

Authors' conclusions
Financial incentives may be effective in changing healthcare professional practice. The evidence has serious methodological limitations and is also very limited in its completeness and generalisability. We found no evidence from reviews that examined the effect of financial incentives on patient outcomes.

An overview of reviews evaluating the effectiveness of financial incentives in changing healthcare professional behaviours and patient outcomes

• GAS is a common cause of upper respiratory tract and skin infections.• Based on strong research evidence, (1) throat culture is the gold standard for diagnosing GAS pharyngitis.• Based on strong research evidence, (1) oral penicillin V K is the antibiotic treatment of choice for GAS pharyngitis because of its efficacy, safety, and narrow spectrum.• Based on strong research evidence, (2) primary prevention of complications of GAS such as ARF involves prompt diagnosis and antibiotic treatment of GAS pharyngitis.• GAS nonsuppurative and suppurative complications may occur and are mediated by interactions between GAS antigens or exotoxins and the patient’s immunesystem.

Group A Streptococcal Infections

PURPOSE: With increased budget constraints, academic health centers (AHCs) have turned their focus on physician compensation. While many AHCs are concerned that compensation programs driven primarily by revenue generation will have a negative impact on their academic mission, little information is available to support this. The authors examined the effects on teaching and clinical productivity of an innovative compensation program for pediatrics primary care faculty at an AHC and related those effects to national standards for productivity. METHOD: A baseline productivity and compensation assessment was conducted for a group of 35 academic general pediatricians. The data were compared with Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) figures for general pediatricians. A productivity-based faculty compensation program using the work component of the relative-value unit (RVU) as the measure of productivity was designed and implemented. Productivity and compensation were measured after the first year of the program and compared with the baseline assessment. The numbers of hours precepting students and residents and the students' evaluations of their clinical experiences before and after implementation of the program were compared. RESULTS: The baseline assessment showed that over half of the faculty had productivity that fell below the MGMA 25th percentile, while the majority had compensation that exceeded this percentile. After implementation of the compensation program, 89% of the faculty increased their clinical productivity. The times faculty spent precepting and students' evaluations before and after program implementation were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Successful productivity-based physician compensation programs can be developed for AHCs.

Using a productivity-based physician compensation program at an academic health center: a case study.

Effective immunization programs have markedly diminished the incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases. As a result, there now exists in society a lower awareness of the actual risks associated with the diseases themselves and a greater prominence of the potential risks of adverse effects associated with vaccines.

Concern regarding public reactions to new vaccine safety issues may place pressure on policymakers and/or health care providers to act quickly in response to new information. However, this concern must be tempered by the necessary caution required to assess the intended and unintended risks and benefits of any action undertaken. The interplay of these potentially competing demands is well illustrated by the recent safety concern involving the use of thimerosal in vaccines.

Thimerosal is a mercury-containing compound that has been widely used as an antimicrobial agent in vaccines for over 60 years. Human exposure to mercury may have potentially significant health consequences. By mid-1999, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had discovered that children could be exposed to an amount of mercury from vaccines that exceeded 1 of 3 existing federal safety thresholds. After this realization, the organized medical and public health communities in the United States became involved in a series of urgent and intense discussions to determine an appropriate response to the issue. This manuscript describes and analyzes the process that led to the July 7, 1999, joint American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)/US Public Health Service (PHS) statement on thimerosal,1 with the goal of suggesting improvements for managing similar vaccine safety concerns in the future.

We conducted structured interviews with over 15 individuals involved in the discussions and negotiations leading to the joint AAP/PHS statement on thimerosal. The individuals represented both the governmental agencies and nongovernmental organizations involved, including the FDA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Centers for Disease Control and …

The process of public policy formulation: the case of thimerosal in vaccines.

Many academic health centers are creating incentive-based physician compensation programs, leading to skepticism regarding the impact on the academic mission. We sought to systematically review the impact of these programs. Most academic compensation programs demonstrate a positive impact on clinical and scholarly productivity, quality of education, and faculty satisfaction.

Physician compensation programs in academic medical centers.

The majority of public and private payers in the United States currently use the Medicare Resource-Based Relative Value Scale as the basis for physician payment Many large group and academic practices have adopted this objective system of physician work to benchmark physician productivity, including using it, wholly or in part, to determine compensation The Resource-Based Relative Value Scale survey instrument, used to value physician services, was designed primarily for procedural services, leading to current concerns that American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) surveys may undervalue nonprocedural evaluation and management services The American Academy of Pediatrics is represented on the RUC, the committee charged with maintaining accurate physician work values across specialties and age groups The Academy, working closely with other primary care and subspecialty societies, actively pursues a balanced RUC membership and a survey instrument that will ensure appropriate work relative value unit assignments, thereby allowing pediatricians to receive appropriate payment for their services relative to other services

Application of the resource-based relative value scale system to pediatrics.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Margie C. Andreae

Author Tools

Chat about Author