Home About us Contact | |||
UK Practice (uk + practice)
Selected AbstractsIn Search of the Regulatory State: Evidence From ScotlandPUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, Issue 4 2001Arthur Midwinter Recent research has suggested that there is movement towards a ,regulatory state' in the UK with regulation an expanding area of government. This article identifies key Scottish differences from UK practice and suggests the growth and scale of regulation inside Scottish government is more modest than suggested by UK-wide research. It also reviews existing oversight arrangements within Scottish government for public service delivery bodies and questions whether many of these activities warrant the label ,regulation', arguing that a more accurate description is performance management. [source] Monitoring after neuraxial opioids for caesarean section: a survey of UK practiceANAESTHESIA, Issue 1 2010J. P. Campbell No abstract is available for this article. [source] Informed consent for epidural analgesia in labour: a survey of UK practice,ANAESTHESIA, Issue 2 2009J. V. Middle Summary Anaesthetists are legally obliged to obtain informed consent before performing regional analgesia in labour. A postal survey of consultant-led UK anaesthetic units was performed in September 2007 to assess practice regarding obtaining informed consent before inserting an epidural, and documentation of the risks discussed. The response rate was 72% (161/223). There was great variation between units regarding which risks women were informed about and the likely incidence of that risk. One hundred and twenty-three respondents out of 157 providing an epidural service (78%) supported a national standardised information card endorsed by the Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association, with all the benefits and risks stated, to be shown to all women before consenting to an epidural in labour. [source] Regional anaesthesia in developing countriesANAESTHESIA, Issue 2007T. Schnittger Summary In modern anaesthesia practice, regional techniques are preferred to general anaesthesia for many types of surgery, particularly in obstetric care. Improved outcomes have been recorded in UK practice, but the techniques remain underutilised in many parts of the world. With encouragement, training and a regular supply of appropriate needles and local anaesthetic agents, the advantages of regional techniques in the developing world could be realised. [source] Prophylaxis against thromboembolism in patients with traumatic brain injury: a survey of UK practiceANAESTHESIA, Issue 8 2001J. M. Cupitt Venous thromboembolism is a major complication associated with traumatic brain injury and is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. There has been a general reluctance over the years to use anticoagulant prophylaxis for patients with head injury who have suffered intracranial bleeding or for whom intracranial surgery is needed. We conducted a postal questionnaire survey of all neurosurgical centres in the United Kingdom, enquiring about the use of thromboprophylactic methods in the management of patients with traumatic brain injury. A diversity of practice and opinion in the use of such methods was evident from the replies received. The survey highlighted concern about the failure to implement even the most simple means of prophylaxis. The evidence for the use of the various methods of prophylaxis is reviewed. [source] Current UK practice of thromboprophylaxis for breast surgeryBRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY (NOW INCLUDES EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY), Issue 10 2006C. C. Kirwan A plea for evidence [source] How we do it: Nerve monitoring in ENT surgery: current UK practiceCLINICAL OTOLARYNGOLOGY, Issue 2 2005C. Hopkins Keypoints ,,Nerve injury may complicate mastoid, thyroid, parotid or cervical lymph node surgery. Continuous intra-operative monitoring may help prevent such injury. ,,Nerve monitoring is used by 51% of UK consultant surgeons performing primary mastoid surgery, 90% undertaking parotid surgery, and 24% of surgeons performing routine thyroid surgery. ,,The efficacy of such monitoring in reducing nerve injury during these procedures has not been established. Unless such evidence emerges, a surgeon will not automatically be considered negligent if operating without monitoring. [source] |