A survey of current clinical practice of permanent prostate brachytherapy in the United States

Author(s):  
Bradley R. Prestidge ◽  
James J. Prete ◽  
Thomas A. Buchholz ◽  
Jay L. Friedland ◽  
Richard G. Stock ◽  
...  
2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard L. Corwin ◽  
Andrew Gettinger ◽  
Ronald G. Pearl ◽  
Mitchell P. Fink ◽  
Mitchell M. Levy ◽  
...  

1992 ◽  
Vol 40 (04) ◽  
pp. 214-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Bilfinger ◽  
J. Moeller ◽  
M. Kurusz ◽  
R. Grimson ◽  
C. Anagnostopoulos

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 243-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah W. Siburt ◽  
Alice E. Holmes

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the current clinical practice in approaches to bimodal programming in the United States. To be specific, if clinicians are recommending bimodal stimulation, who programs the hearing aid in the bimodal condition, and what method is used for programming the hearing aid? Method An 11-question online survey was created and sent via email to a comprehensive list of cochlear implant programming centers in the United States. The survey was sent to 360 recipients. Results Respondents in this study represented a diverse group of clinical settings (response rate: 26%). Results indicate little agreement about who programs the hearing aids, when they are programmed, and how they are programmed in the bimodal condition. Analysis of small versus large implant centers indicated small centers are less likely to add a device to the contralateral ear. Conclusions Although a growing number of cochlear implant recipients choose to wear a hearing aid on the contralateral ear, there is inconsistency in the current clinical approach to bimodal programming. These survey results provide evidence of large variability in the current bimodal programming practices and indicate a need for more structured clinical recommendations and programming approaches.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan A. Gliedt ◽  
Stephen M. Perle ◽  
Aaron A. Puhl ◽  
Sarah Daehler ◽  
Michael J. Schneider ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Professional subgroups are common and may play a role in aiding professional maturity or impeding professional legitimization. The chiropractic profession in the United States has a long history of diverse intra-professional subgroups with varying ideologies and practice styles. To our knowledge, large-scale quantification of chiropractic professional subgroups in the United States has not been conducted. The purpose of this study was to quantify and describe the clinical practice beliefs and behaviors associated with United States chiropractic subgroups. Methods A 10% random sample of United States licensed chiropractors (n = 8975) was selected from all 50 state regulatory board lists and invited to participate in a survey. The survey consisted of a 7-item questionnaire; 6 items were associated with chiropractic ideological and practice characteristics and 1 item was related to the self-identified role of chiropractic in the healthcare system which was utilized as the dependent variable to identify chiropractic subgroups. Multinomial logistic regression with predictive margins was used to analyze which responses to the 6 ideology and practice characteristic items were predictive of chiropractic subgroups. Results A total of 3538 responses were collected (39.4% response rate). Respondents self-identified into three distinct subgroups based on the perceived role of the chiropractic profession in the greater healthcare system: 56.8% were spine/neuromusculoskeletal focused; 22.0% were primary care focused; and 21.2% were vertebral subluxation focused. Patterns of responses to the 6 ideologies and practice characteristic items were substantially different across the three professional subgroups. Conclusions Respondents self-identified into one of three distinct intra-professional subgroups. These subgroups can be differentiated along themes related to clinical practice beliefs and behaviors.


2011 ◽  
pp. 693-702
Author(s):  
John Ribera

The incorporation of telehealth into the daily clinical practice of audiologists in the United States is in its early stages of development. Some initial research has been conducted in order to validate the use of telehealth technologies in providing hearing and balance evaluation and management services (Krumm, Huffman, Dick, & Klich, 2008; Krumm, Ribera, & Klich, 2007;Krumm, Ribera, & Schmiedge, 2005; Lancaster, Krumm, & Ribera, 2008). More research is needed. This chapter suggests possible applications using existing technology and explores the possibility of virtual audiology clinics nation-wide and internationally.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document