scholarly journals Interactive Verification of Medical Guidelines

Author(s):  
Jonathan Schmitt ◽  
Alwin Hoffmann ◽  
Michael Balser ◽  
Wolfgang Reif ◽  
Mar Marcos
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Michael L Gross

Although there are few restrictions on killing combatants, the contemporary law of war bans weapons that cause superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering. Because military necessity and humanitarian norms often conflict, no clear regulations have emerged. Instead, states sometimes ban weapons because they cause horrific wounds. But this determination is subjective and has led the Red Cross to seek objective medical guidelines on unnecessary suffering. A close look shows how it is often difficult to apply these guidelines to new non-lethal technologies, which include electromagnetic, pharmacological, and neurological weapons. These weapons do not cause obvious injury and suffering and may even reduce combatant and civilian injuries. Nevertheless, they can cause intense transient pain or impinge upon human dignity when they undermine cognitive capabilities. Weighing the costs of new technologies against their benefits remains an abiding challenge for humanitarian law.


2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 352-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mor Peleg ◽  
John Fox ◽  
Vivek Patkar ◽  
David Glasspool ◽  
Ioannis Chronakis ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 156-163
Author(s):  
Jochen Bauer ◽  
Ina Volkhardt ◽  
Markus Michl ◽  
Christina Blumthaler ◽  
Sergej Wiebe ◽  
...  

In this paper the NutriScale-Algorithm is described. NutriScale interprets meals and calculates health related scores. It is based on a food pyramid, which was created by the German Nutrition Society according to existing food related and evidence based medical guidelines. Furthermore various food related mobile phone apps and professional desktop applications were analyzed to figure out, what functionality and data sources are appropriate to create such a promising key figure for food selection like NutriScale.


Author(s):  
Simon Bäumler ◽  
Michael Balser ◽  
Andriy Dunets ◽  
Wolfgang Reif ◽  
Jonathan Schmitt

1998 ◽  
Vol 95 ◽  
pp. 72-73
Author(s):  
D. Pallapies ◽  
J. Klees ◽  
P.R. Conner ◽  
A. Zober

Author(s):  
Eric Jou ◽  
Andrew Kailin Zhou ◽  
Jamie Sin Ying Ho ◽  
Azeem Thahir

Abstract Purpose There are growing concerns with the widely used glucocorticoids during the Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic due to the associated immunosuppressive effects, which may increase the risk of COVID-19 infection and worsen COVID-19 patient outcome. Heavily affecting orthopaedics, the pandemic led to delay and cancellation of almost all surgical cases, and procedures including perioperative intra-articular corticosteroid injections (ICIs) saw similar decreases. However, the benefits of ICI treatments during the pandemic may outweigh these potential risks, and their continued use may be warranted. Methods A literature search was conducted, and all relevant articles including original articles and reviews were identified and considered in full for inclusion, and analysed with expert opinion. Epidemiological statistics and medical guidelines were consulted from relevant authorities. Results ICIs allow a targeted approach on the affected joint and are effective in reducing pain while improving functional outcome and patient quality-of-life. ICIs delay the requirement for surgery, accommodating for the increased healthcare burden during the pandemic, while reducing postoperative hospital stay, bringing significant financial benefits. However, ICIs can exert systemic effects and suppress the immune system. ICIs may increase the risk of COVID-19 infection and reduce the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccinations, leading to important public health implications. Conclusion Perioperative ICI treatments may bring significant, multifaceted benefits during the pandemic. However, ICIs increase the risk of infection, and perioperative COVID-19 is associated with mortality. The use of ICIs during the COVID-19 pandemic should therefore be considered carefully on an individual patient basis, weighing the associated risks and benefits.


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-133
Author(s):  
Tomasz Krzanowski ◽  
Lila Dabkowska ◽  
Monika Wujec ◽  
Ewa Kedzierska

AbstractAn increasing number of men around the world suffer from erectile dysfunction (ED). Indeed, according to the sexuality study conducted by Professor Izdebski, 1 out of 10 men in Poland suffers from ED. The problem is found among men of any age, however, 60% of all patients are between 40 and 60 years old, thus in their prime, and who still want to fully enjoy life. Not only do the effects of ED affect a man, but they have influence on his relationship and partner as well. In spite of a growing awareness within society, the problem remains perceived as embarrassing, which leads patients to treat themselves on their own, delaying a visit to their doctors. Meanwhile, in many cases, ED may be the first symptom of more serious diseases, such as diabetes, or result from the sideeffects of applied drugs. A breakthrough in the oral medication treatment of ED was observed when a new phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE-5-inhibitor) - sildenafil citrate (Viagra®) - was introduced. Nowadays, 5 active substances from this group are being applied. The current medical guidelines recommend PDE-5 inhibitors as the firstline therapy for most men with ED, irrespective of the cause and severity of the disease. Recently, sildenafil at the dose of 25 mg came into the market without prescription. This paper presents an overview and update of the PDE-5 inhibitors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document