Suchergebnisse

Abstract Background Early identification of permanent hearing impairment in children enables appropriate intervention which reduces adverse developmental outcomes. The UK Government has introduced a universal hearing screening programme for neonates. All involved health professionals, including those in Primary Care, need to be aware of the service to enable them to offer appropriate support to their patients. A programme of information dissemination within Primary Care was therefore undertaken. The aim of the current study was to determine the extent to which the information had reached General Practitioners (GPs), the GPs' preferred mode of dissemination and the sources from which GPs accessed information Methods Postal questionnaire survey of a randomised sample of 1000 GPs in the Phase I pilot sites of the Neonatal Hearing Screening Programme (NHSP). Results Responses were received from 54.2% of the sample. Just under 50% of those responding had received information, 62.2% of respondents said they would like to receive more information and the preferred methods of dissemination were the written word and web-sites to allow access when needed. Few GPs perceive themselves to have a core role in the delivery of the NHSP and thence a need for knowledge in the subject. Many are keen to delegate detail to a third party, usually the health visitor, who has traditionally had responsibility for hearing screening. Conclusions Dissemination efforts for service developments of relevance to GPs should concentrate on advertising a website address via brief but memorable posted literature and/or articles in relevant journals and magazines. The website should be GP-friendly, and have a dedicated area for GPs including information of specific relevance and downloadable information sheets.

Worldwide, cattle are transported in great numbers for breeding, fattening and slaughter. Within the European Union, the Council Regulation 1/2005 states that all animals must be fit for transport. Yet, the line between fit and unfit is blurred as the regulation allows for animals that are slightly ill or injured to be transported. However, "slightly ill or injured" lack a clear definition leaving room for individual interpretation of fitness for transport with potential negative implications in terms of both animal welfare and legal certainty. The aim of the present study was to gain an understanding of cattle farmers' experience with and doubt about assessment of fitness for transport-a topic that has received limited scientific attention, despite the important role of farmers in maintaining acceptable animal welfare during transport. The results of the study are based on 119 Danish cattle farmers' answers to a questionnaire survey. The majority of respondents felt they possessed the knowledge and skills required for assessment of fitness for transport. However, a considerable large part of the respondents, one third approximately, reported to be in doubt at least sometimes and likewise one third felt a lack of knowledge at least sometimes. In addition, more than half of the respondents reported that they at least sometimes found it difficult to understand the rules to address the disconnect between on-farm and slaughterhouse decisions and fitness for on-farm slaughter. These results indicate that learning materials, assessment tools and training programs could be helpful for a large group of cattle farmers in order to secure animal welfare during transport. The results also underline the need for further research to clarify what constitutes a "fit" vs. "unfit" animal.

Objectives We surveyed the UK medical qualifiers of 1993. We asked closed questions about their careers; and invited them to give us comments, if they wished, about any aspect of their work. Our aim in this paper is to report on the topics that this senior cohort of UK-trained doctors who work in UK medicine raised with us.Design Questionnaire surveyParticipants 3479 contactable UK-trained medical graduates of 1993.Setting UK.Main outcome measures Comments made by doctors about their work, and their views about medical careers and training in the UK.Method Postal and email questionnaires.Results Response rate was 72% (2507); 2252 were working in UK medicine, 816 (36%) of whom provided comments. Positive comments outweighed negative in the areas of their own job satisfaction and satisfaction with their training. However, 23% of doctors who commented expressed dissatisfaction with aspects of junior doctors' training, the impact of working time regulations, and with the requirement for doctors to make earlier career decisions than in the past about their choice of specialty. Some doctors were concerned about government health service policy; others were dissatisfied with the availability of family-friendly/part-time work, and we are concerned about attitudes to gender and work-life balance.Conclusions Though satisfied with their own training and their current position, many senior doctors felt that changes to working hours and postgraduate training had reduced the level of experience gained by newer graduates. They were also concerned about government policy interventions.