Care of the Cow and Calf at Calving Time

PDF pages: 1

Guidelines for developing agricultural information portals in the Southern African Development Community Region (SADC)

The Internet and the Web have become a source of agricultural information for many people, including researchers working in agricultural research organizations. According to Besemer, Addison and Ferguson (2003:2), the Web has changed the information landscape in the field of agriculture and natural resources. The relatively small investment required to set up a Web site enables a great many institutions to become instant information providers

Development and validation of a severity scale for leprosy Type 1 Reactions

Objectives: To develop a valid and reliable quantitative measure of leprosy Type 1 reactions.Methods: A scale was developed from previous scales which had not been validated. The face and content validity were assessed following consultation with recognised experts in the field. The construct validity was determined by applying the scale to patients in Bangladesh and Brazil who had been diagnosed with leprosy Type 1 reaction. An expert categorized each patient's reaction as mild or moderate or severe. Another worker applied the scale. This was done independently. In a subsequent stage of the study the agreement between two observers was assessed.Results: The scale had good internal consistency demonstrated by a Cronbach's alpha &gt;0.8. Removal of three items from the original scale resulted in better discrimination between disease severity categories. Cut off points for Type 1 reaction severities were determined using Receiver Operating Characteristic curves. A mild Type 1 reaction is characterized using the final scale by a score of 4 or less. A moderate reaction is a score of between 4.5 and 8.5. A severe reaction is a score of 9 or more.Conclusions: We have developed a valid and reliable tool for quantifying leprosy Type 1 reaction severity and believe this will be a useful tool in research of this condition, in observational and intervention studies, and in the comparison of clinical and laboratory parameters.<br/

Tiffany : research management in voedingsonderzoek

Het Top Institute Food and Nutrition (TIFN) is een samenwerkingsverband tussen publieke en private partners dat zich bezighoudt met wetenschappelijke doorbraken in voeding en gezondheid. Het in opdracht van TIFN ontwikkelde Tiffany is een research management systeem dat ontworpen is om elk stadium van wetenschappelijk onderzoek in detail te kunnen documenteren en ontsluiten. Uitleg wordt gegeven van de mogelijkheden, de voordelen en de architectuur van Tiffan

Point-of-care C-reactive protein testing in Febrile Children in General Practice

__Background:__ Point-of-care testing for C-reactive protein (CRP) may be helpful in differentiating viral from bacterial infection. Such a device should give results comparable to laboratory testing. The aim was to evaluate two point-of-care CRP tests (Nycocard and QuikRead) in febrile children in general practice, compared to a reference immunoturbidimetric assay. __Methods:__ Cross-sectional study of febrile children aged 3 months to 6 years presented to a general practice out-of-hours service. Children were visited at home, where blood was taken for the tests, within 24 hours of presentation. The Nycocard test was performed at home, whereas the QuikRead and reference test were performed in the laboratory. __Results:__ 76 children were enrolled. All three CRP tests were performed in 59 children. The mean difference between the reference test and Nycocard and QuikRead was 0.6 mg/L and –6.1 mg/L, respectively. The slopes of the Passing and Bablok regression were 0.95 (95% CI 0.9-1.0) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.81-0.85) for Nycocard and QuikRead, respectively. __Conclusion:__ Up to a concentration of 160 mg/L the Nycocard correlated well with the reference test, while the QuikRead underestimated concentrations above 60 mg/L. The Nycocard test seems a good candidate for CRP point-of-care testing in general practice

Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) Programme : study protocol for evaluating the feasibility and impact on case detection rates of contact tracing and single dose rifampicin

Introduction: The reported number of new leprosy patients has barely changed in recent years. Thus, additional approaches or modifications to the current standard of passive case detection are needed to interrupt leprosy transmission. Large-scale clinical trials with single dose rifampicin (SDR) given as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to contacts of newly diagnosed patients with leprosy have shown a 50–60% reduction of the risk of developing leprosy over the following 2 years. To accelerate the uptake of this evidence and introduction of PEP into national leprosy programmes, data on the effectiveness, impact and feasibility of contact tracing and PEP for leprosy are required. The leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme was designed to obtain those data. Methods and analysis: The LPEP programme evaluates feasibility, effectiveness and impact of PEP with SDR in pilot areas situated in several leprosy endemic countries: India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Complementary sites are located in Brazil and Cambodia. From 2015 to 2018, contact persons of patients with leprosy are traced, screened for symptoms and assessed for eligibility to receive SDR. The intervention is implemented by the national leprosy programmes, tailored to local conditions and capacities, and relying on available human and material resources. It is coordinated on the ground with the help of the in-country partners of the International Federation of Anti-Leprosy Associations (ILEP). A robust data collection and reporting system is established in the pilot areas with regular monitoring and quality control, contributing to the strengthening of the national surveillance systems to become more action-oriented. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the relevant ethics committees in the countries. Results and lessons learnt from the LPEP programme will be published in peer-reviewed journals and should provide important evidence and guidance for national and global policymakers to strengthen current leprosy elimination strategies

The feasibility of an allergy management support system (AMSS) for IgE-mediated allergy in primary care

Background: The allergy management support system (AMSS) was developed to assist general practitioners (GPs) to handle the increasing burden of allergic diseases and facilitates the diagnosis and management of allergy. The aim of this cluster-randomized controlled pilot study was to test the feasibility of this AMSS for primary care. Methods: GPs received diagnostic and management recommendations generated by the AMSS in addition to sIgE-test results (intervention) or GPs received sIgE-test results only (control). The AMSS recommendations are based on the previously developed patient-completed AMSS questionnaire and sIgE-test results. The AMSS was considered feasible when > 70% of the AMSS recommendations were sent to the GP within ten working days of sIgE-testing. GPs completed a questionnaire on their diagnosis and management before (T1) and after (T2) receiving sIgE test results. Agreement and disagreement concerning diagnosis, medication and referrals between GPs and AMSS was investigated at T1 and T2. A total agreement score between GPs and AMSS was calculated. GPs in the intervention group completed a questionnaire to evaluate the utility of the AMSS. Semi-structured interviews were used to explore the motivation of GPs who did not include patients in this pilot study. Results: Twenty-seven GPs included 101 patients. Forty-two patients (72%) completed the AMSS questionnaire in the intervention group. The majority of the AMSS recommendations (93%) were returned to the GP within 10 working days after sIgE-test results were known [mean (SD) 4.7 (4.0) working days]. GPs in the intervention group reported largely following the AMSS recommendations in 71% of cases. The total agreement scores concerning diagnosis were significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the intervention group than the control group [mean (SD); 0.9 (1.8) vs - 0.8 (1.0)]. The agreement concerning medication or referral between GPs and AMSS did not differ between the intervention and the control group. GPs in the intervention group were reasonably positive about the AMSS. Not enrolling patients was not caused by anticipated ineffectiveness of the AMSS. Conclusion: The AMSS can be considered to be feasible for primary care. GPs tend to follow the AMSS recommendations. The AMSS may contribute to the empowerment of GPs to better manage allergy patients in primary care.Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN36780877. Registered 23 November 2017 (retrospectively registered)