Resp Care
-
Review
Institutional review board consideration of chart reviews, case reports, and observational studies.
Though the need for human-subjects review is readily apparent to investigators when conducting a randomized clinical trial, that same requirement is often less obvious when considering activities such as chart reviews, observational studies, or even case reports. In some cases all that is needed is notification of the institutional review board, which might then exempt the research. ⋯ In all cases, including case reviews, quality-improvement projects, and chart reviews, the most cautious approach for the investigator is to discuss regulatory requirements with the institutional review board official to ensure compliance. I will review what constitutes human-subjects research and how investigators may access protected health information, and consider some examples of observational research.
-
Comparative Study
Wheeze detection in the pediatric intensive care unit: comparison among physician, nurses, respiratory therapists, and a computerized respiratory sound monitor.
To correlate wheeze detection in the pediatric intensive care unit among staff members (a physician, nurses, and respiratory therapists [RTs]) and digital recordings from a computerized respiratory sound monitor (PulmoTrack). ⋯ Between the physician, RTs, and nurses there was agreement about the presence of wheeze in critically ill patients in the pediatric intensive care unit. Compared to the objective acoustic measurements from the PulmoTrack, the intensive care unit staff was similar in their ability to detect the absence of wheeze. The PulmoTrack was better than the staff in detecting wheeze.
-
Comparative Study
Readability assessment of internet-based consumer health information.
A substantial amount of consumer health-related information is available on the Internet. Studies suggest that consumer comprehension may be compromised if content exceeds a 7th-grade reading level, which is the average American reading level identified by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS). ⋯ Our findings support that Web-based medical information intended for consumer use is written above USDHHS recommended reading levels. Compliance with these recommendations may increase the likelihood of consumer comprehension.