The safety of rosuvastatin in comparison with other statins in over 25 000 statin users in the Saskatchewan Health Databases

2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (10) ◽  
pp. 953-961 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Alberto García-Rodríguez ◽  
Antonio González-Pérez ◽  
Mary Rose Stang ◽  
Mari-Ann Wallander ◽  
Saga Johansson
Keyword(s):  
CJEM ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 384-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taofiq Oyedokun ◽  
Andrew Donauer ◽  
James Stempien ◽  
Shari McKay

ABSTRACTObjectivesPatients often bring their smartphones to the emergency department (ED) and want to record their procedures. There was no clear ED recording policy in the Saskatoon Health Region nor is there in the new Saskatchewan Health Authority. With limited literature on the subject, clinicians currently make the decision to allow/deny the request to record independently. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare patient and clinician perspectives concerning patients recording, in general, and recording their own procedures in the ED.MethodsSurveys were developed for patients and clinicians with respect to history and opinions about recording/being recorded. ED physicians and nurses, and patients>17 years old who entered the ED with a laceration requiring stitches were recruited to participate; 110 patients and 156 staff responded.ResultsThere was a significant difference between the proportion of patients (61.7% [66/107]) and clinicians (28.1% [41/146]) who believed that patients should be allowed to video record their procedure. There was also a significant difference between clinicians and patients with regard to audio recording, but not “selfies” (pictures). However, with no current policy, 47.8% (66/138) of clinicians said that they would allow videos if asked, with caveats about staff and patient privacy, prior consent, and procedure/patient care.ConclusionContrary to patients’ views, clinicians were not in favour of allowing audio or video recordings in the ED. Concerns around consent, staff and patient privacy, and legal issues warrant the development of a detailed policy if the decision is made in favour of recording.


Spine ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 23 (17) ◽  
pp. 1860-1866 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. David Cassidy ◽  
Linda J. Carroll ◽  
Pierre Côté

2003 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 181-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristyn D. Hall ◽  
Alison M. Stephen ◽  
Bruce A. Reeder ◽  
Nazeem Muhajarine ◽  
Gail Lasiuk

Research on relationships between socioeconomic status and Canadians’ diet is limited. The current study investigated differences by education in dietary variables shown to be related to obesity; it included three age groups of Saskatchewan women who participated in the 1992 to 1993 Heart Health Intervention Evaluation baseline study. Multistage sampling was used to select randomly from the Saskatchewan Health Insurance Registration File. The overall response rate was 42.6%; a sample representative of the general Saskatchewan population was obtained. Three-day estimated food records and demographic information from 396 women aged 18 to 74 years were subdivided into three age categories: 18 to 34 years, 35 to 54 years, and 55 to 74 years. For the 18- to 34-year group, obesity was significantly more prevalent with lower education; trends were similar for the older age groups. Under-reporting of energy intake (indicated by an energy intake:basal metabolic rate ratio of <1.1) was related to obesity but not to education. The greatest differences in diet between educational groups were observed in the 18- to 34-year group; fewer differences existed in the 35- to 54-year group, and none in the 55- to 74-year group. Health promotion efforts need to be targeted appropriately, and based on differences in dietary intakes by socioeconomic group. Research should help promote an understanding of the reasons for differences in diet by socioeconomic status.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document