Riparian habitat on the Humboldt River, Deeth to Elko, Nevada

A map inventory of the major habitat types existing along the Humbolt River riparian zone in Nevada is described. Through aerialphotography, 16 riparian habitats are mapped that describe the ecological relationships between soil and vegetation types, flooding and soil erosion, and the various management practices employed to date. The specific land and water management techniques and their impact on the environment are considered

Assessment of LANDSAT for rangeland mapping, Rush Valley, Utah

The feasibility of using LANDSAT MSS (multispectral scanner) data to identify and map cover types for rangeland, and to determine comparative condition of the ecotypes was assessed. A supporting objective is to assess the utility of various forms of aerial photography in the process. If rangelands can be efficiently mapped with Landsat data, as supported by appropriate aerial photography and field data, then uniform standards of cover classification and condition may be applied across the rangelands of the state. Further, a foundation may be established for long-term monitoring of range trend, using the same satellite system over time

An integrated LANDSAT/ancillary data classification of desert rangeland

Range inventorying methods using LANDSAT MSS data, coupled with ancillary data were examined. The study area encompassed nearly 20,000 acres in Rush Valley, Utah. The vegetation is predominately desert shrub and annual grasses, with some annual forbs. Three LANDSAT scenes were evaluated using a Kauth-Thomas brightness/greenness data transformation (May, June, and August dates). The data was classified using a four-band maximum-likelihood classifier. A print map was taken into the field to determine the relationship between print symbols and vegetation. It was determined that classification confusion could be greatly reduced by incorporating geomorphic units and soil texture (coarse vs fine) into the classification. Spectral data, geomorphic units, and soil texture were combined in a GIS format to produce a final vegetation map identifying 12 vegetation types

Follow-on proposal identifying environmental features for land management decisions

Urban morphology (an examination of spatial fabric and structure), natural ecosystem (investigations emphasizing biophysical processes and patterns), and human ecosystem (emphasizing socio-economic and engineering parameters) were studied. The most critical variable, transpiration, in the ASPCON model, created by Jaynes (1978), describing the hydrology of aspen to conifer succession was studied to improve the accuracy. Transpiration is determined by a canopy transpiration model which estimates consumptive water use (CWU) for specific species and a plant activity index. Also studied was Pinyon-Juniper woodland erosion

Emollient prescribing formularies and guidelines in England, 2021:a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Emollients are a mainstay of treatment for dry skin conditions. In the UK, prescribers are usually expected to follow local National Health Service (NHS) formularies. A previous study in 2018 showed that the recommended emollients across England and Wales varied widely. Evidence has since emerged that bath additives provide no additional clinical benefit in eczema. AIM: To compare emollient formularies and guidelines in England. METHODS: Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) formularies and guidelines were identified in April–May 2021, compiled and then analysed descriptively. RESULTS: In total, 105 CCGs, 72 emollient formularies and 47 emollient prescribing guidelines were identified. There were internal inconsistencies between formularies and their accompanying guidelines in 19% of cases. The majority (68%) of formularies/guidelines were organized using a ranking system. In total, 126 different leave‐on emollients were named. Creams and ointments were universally available and were the most recommended first‐line types. Cost was more likely than patient choice to be recommended as a criterion for selecting which emollient to prescribe. Aqueous cream was the leave‐on emollient most commonly not recommended. Nearly three‐quarters (74%) of formularies stated that bath additives should not be prescribed. CONCLUSION: All CCGs in England have an emollient formulary/guideline, but there is still great variability between them in their recommendations. Although the number of formularies/guidelines has reduced since 2017, there has been an increase in the total number of unique recommended leave‐on emollients. Most CCGs are no longer recommending bath emollients for eczema

Land Use Inventory of Salt Lake County, Utah From Color Infrared Aerial Photography 1982

Salt lake County, Utah\u27s major population center, continues to experience rapid urban growth. The Impacts of urbanization on land use patterns and natural resources in the county are of particular Interest to both state and local policy makers and planners. The effect of urban development on a dwindling agricultural land base and water resources must be assessed to allow a rational basis for future water allocation and land use planning

Comparison of lotions, creams, gels and ointments for the treatment of childhood eczema: The BEE RCT

BackgroundEmollients are recommended for children with eczema (atopic eczema/dermatitis). A lack of head-to-head comparisons of the effectiveness and acceptability of the different types of emollients has resulted in a ‘trial and error’ approach to prescribing.ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and acceptability of four commonly used types of emollients for the treatment of childhood eczema.DesignFour group, parallel, individually randomised, superiority randomised clinical trials with a nested qualitative study, completed in 2021. A purposeful sample of parents/children was interviewed at ≈ 4 and ≈ 16 weeks.SettingPrimary care (78 general practitioner surgeries) in England.ParticipantsChildren aged between 6 months and 12 years with eczema, of at least mild severity, and with no known sensitivity to the study emollients or their constituents.InterventionsStudy emollients sharing the same characteristics in the four types of lotion, cream, gel or ointment, alongside usual care, and allocated using a web-based randomisation system. Participants were unmasked and the researcher assessing the Eczema Area Severity Index scores was masked.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure scores over 16 weeks. The secondary outcomes were Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure scores over 52 weeks, Eczema Area Severity Index score at 16 weeks, quality of life (Atopic Dermatitis Quality of Life, Child Health Utility-9 Dimensions and EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, scores), Dermatitis Family Impact and satisfaction levels at 16 weeks.ResultsA total of 550 children were randomised to receive lotion (analysed for primary outcome 131/allocated 137), cream (137/140), gel (130/135) or ointment (126/138). At baseline, 86.0% of participants were white and 46.4% were female. The median (interquartile range) age was 4 (2–8) years and the median Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure score was 9.3 (SD 5.5). There was no evidence of a difference in mean Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure scores over the first 16 weeks between emollient types (global p = 0.765): adjusted Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure pairwise differences – cream–lotion 0.42 (95% confidence interval –0.48 to 1.32), gel–lotion 0.17 (95% confidence interval –0.75 to 1.09), ointment–lotion –0.01 (95% confidence interval –0.93 to 0.91), gel–cream –0.25 (95% confidence interval –1.15 to 0.65), ointment–cream –0.43 (95% confidence interval –1.34 to 0.48) and ointment–gel –0.18 (95% confidence interval –1.11 to 0.75). There was no effect modification by parent expectation, age, disease severity or the application of UK diagnostic criteria, and no differences between groups in any of the secondary outcomes. Median weekly use of allocated emollient, non-allocated emollient and topical corticosteroids was similar across groups. Overall satisfaction was highest for lotions and gels. There was no difference in the number of adverse reactions and there were no significant adverse events. In the nested qualitative study (n = 44 parents, n = 25 children), opinions about the acceptability of creams and ointments varied most, yet problems with all types were reported. Effectiveness may be favoured over acceptability. Parents preferred pumps and bottles over tubs and reported improved knowledge about, and use of, emollients as a result of taking part in the trial.LimitationsParents and clinicians were unmasked to allocation. The findings may not apply to non-study emollients of the same type or to children from more ethnically diverse backgrounds.ConclusionsThe four emollient types were equally effective. Satisfaction with the same emollient types varies, with different parents/children favouring different ones. Users need to be able to choose from a range of emollient types to find one that suits them.Future workFuture work could focus on how best to support shared decision-making of different emollient types and evaluations of other paraffin-based, non-paraffin and ‘novel’ emollients.Trial registrationThis trial is registered as ISRCTN84540529 and EudraCT 2017-000688-34.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (HTA 15/130/07) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 19. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

GPs' experiences of diagnosing and managing childhood eczema:A qualitative study in primary care

BackgroundEczema is common among children, and in the UK the majority are managed by GPs. The most common cause of poor disease control is incorrect use of topical treatments. There is a lack of research into the challenges faced by GPs in diagnosing and managing this condition.AimTo explore the experiences of GPs in assessing and managing children with eczema.Design and settingQualitative study in primary care in England.MethodSemi-structured interviews with 15 GPs were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically using the framework method.ResultsGPs described a paucity of dermatology training. Although most GPs were confident diagnosing uncomplicated eczema, they reported using a trial-and-error approach to prescribing emollients, and were uncertain about quantities of topical treatments to issue. Mild and moderate potency topical corticosteroids (TCS) were commonly used, but most GPs lacked confidence in recommending potent TCS, and viewed parents or carers to be fearful of using all strengths of TCS. GPs perceived adherence to treatments to be low, but provision of information to support self-care was variable. Routine review of medication use or disease control was uncommon, which GPs attributed to service constraints. Participants’ views on the causes and management of eczema were perceived to be at odds with parents and carers, who were said to be overly focused on an underlying cause, such as allergy.ConclusionGP uncertainty in managing eczema, lack of routine information and review, and perceived dissonance with parents around causation and management may be contributing to low concordance with treatments.</jats:sec

How parents and children evaluate emollients for childhood eczema: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Eczema affects one in five children in the UK. Regular application of emollients is routinely recommended for children with eczema. There are four main emollient types, but no clear evidence of which is best. The current ‘trial and error’ approach to find suitable emollients can be frustrating for parents, children, and clinicians. AIM: To identify how parents and children experience and evaluate emollients. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interview study, nested within a primary care trial of emollients (Best Emollients for Eczema [BEE] trial). METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with children with eczema and their parents were conducted. Participants were purposively sampled on emollient type (lotion, cream, gel, or ointment), age, and eczema severity. RESULTS: Forty-four parents were interviewed, with children participating in 24 of those interviews. There was no clear preference for any one emollient type. The strongest theme was the variation of experience in each of the four types. Participants focused on thickness and absorbency, both positively and negatively, to frame their evaluations. Effectiveness and acceptability were both considered when evaluating an emollient but effectiveness was the primary driver for continued use. For some, participating in the trial had changed their knowledge and behaviour of emollients, resulting in use that was more regular and for a longer duration. CONCLUSION: There is no one emollient that is suitable for everyone, and parents/children prioritise different aspects of emollients. Future research could evaluate decision aids and/or tester pots of different types, which could enable clinicians and parents/children to work collaboratively to identify the best emollient for them