Influence of integrated nutrient management on physiological parameters of lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.)

During the rabi season of 2021, a field experiment was conducted in the North Western plains of Uttarakhand at Crop Research Centre, School of Agriculture, Uttaranchal University, Dehradun to examine the impact of integrated nutrient management (INM) on lentil growth, yield, and economics (Lens culinaris Medik.). The experiment was laid in Randomized Block Design with seven treatments i.e. T1 (Control, 100% RDF (Recommended Dose of Fertilizers), T2 (75 % NPK (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium) + 25 % FYM (Farm Yard Manure), T3 (50 % NPK + 50 % FYM), T4 (75 % NPK + 25 % Azotobacter), T5 (50 % NPK + 50 % Azotobacter), T6 (75 % NPK + 25 % (Vermicompost + Azotobacter)) & T7 (50 % NPK+ 50 % (Vermicompost + Azotobacter)). The treatments T7 with the combination of 50 per cent NPK and 50 per cent vermicompost plus Azotobacter showed maximum LAI (Leaf Area Index) (0.25), NAR (Net Assimilation Rate) (0.0020), chlorophyll content (3.05), dry matter (4.44 g), and protein content (26.99 %) in contrast to other six treatments

Eye care infrastructure and human resources for managing diabetic retinopathy in India: The India 11-city 9-state study.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of information on the availability of services for diagnosis and management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in India. OBJECTIVES: The study was undertaken to document existing healthcare infrastructure and practice patterns for managing DR. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 11 cities and included public and private eye care providers. Both multispecialty and stand-alone eye care facilities were included. Information was collected on the processes used in all steps of the program, from how diabetics were identified for screening through to policies about follow-up after treatment by administering a semistructured questionnaire and by using observational checklists. RESULTS: A total of 86 eye units were included (31.4% multispecialty hospitals; 68.6% stand-alone clinics). The availability of a dedicated retina unit was reported by 68.6% (59) facilities. The mean number of outpatient consultations per year was 45,909 per responding facility, with nearly half being new registrations. A mean of 631 persons with sight-threatening-DR (ST-DR) were registered per year per facility. The commonest treatment for ST-DR was laser photocoagulation. Only 58% of the facilities reported having a full-time retina specialist on their rolls. More than half the eye care facilities (47; 54.6%) reported that their ophthalmologists would like further training in retina. Half (51.6%) of the facilities stated that they needed laser or surgical equipment. About 46.5% of the hospitals had a system to track patients needing treatment or for follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted existing gaps in service provision at eye care facilities in India

Human resources, patient load, and infrastructure at institutions providing diabetic care in India: The India 11-city 9-state study.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of information on the practice patterns and available human resources and services for screening for eye complications among persons with diabetes in India. OBJECTIVES: The study was undertaken to document existing health care infrastructure and practice patterns for managing diabetes and screening for eye complications. METHODS: This cross-sectional, hospital-based survey was conducted in 11 cities where public and private diabetic care providers were identified. Both multispecialty and standalone diabetic care facilities were included. A semi-structured questionnaire was administered to senior representative(s) of each institution to evaluate parameters using the World Health Organization health systems framework. RESULTS: We interviewed physicians in 73 hospitals (61.6% multispecialty hospitals; 38.4% standalone clinics). Less than a third reported having skilled personnel for direct ophthalmoscopy. About 74% had provision for glycated hemoglobin testing. Only a third had adequate vision charts. Printed protocols on management of diabetes were available only in 31.5% of the facilities. Only one in four facilities had a system for tracking diabetics. Half the facilities reported having access to records from the treating ophthalmologists. Direct observation of the services provided showed that reported figures in relation to availability of patient support services were overestimated by around 10%. Three fourths of the information sheets and half the glycemia monitoring cards contained information on the eye complications and the need for a regular eye examination. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted existing gaps in service provision at diabetic care centers in India