Department of Health and Social Security, Central Health Services Council, Rehabilitation: Report of a Sub-Committee of the Standing Medical Advisory Committee, HMSO, London, 1972. 187 pp. £1.00.

1973 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-181
Author(s):  
Gordon Rose
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 119-126
Author(s):  
Patricia Mayer ◽  
◽  
David Beyda ◽  
Bree Johnston

We describe the process by which all hospitals and health systems in Arizona, normally competitors, rapidly cooperated to develop a statewide protocol (“Addendum”) delineating how to allocate scarce resources during the COVID-19 pandemic should triage be required anywhere in the state. Eight physician ethicists from seven different health systems created the Addendum, which was accepted by all hospitals and health systems, approved by the State Disaster Medical Advisory Committee (SDMAC), and then formally adopted by the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS). In addition, the entire state developed a plan to “stick together” such that no facility would be forced to triage unless all were overwhelmed. Because we are unaware of any other state’s hospitals and health systems producing and committing to a shared triage protocol and plan, we believe this experience can serve as a model for other locales during the absence of sufficient state or federal guidance.


2008 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 205-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan Yacoub ◽  
Ian Hall ◽  
Jane Bernal

Medium-secure care services developed in England following the Butler report (Home Office & Department of Health and Social Security, 1975). They were established to address the major gap in provision between high-secure and local mental health services. However, the development of special secure services for offenders with a learning disability has largely been neglected (Snowden, 1995). People with learning disability who require secure in-patient care are often placed in remote and costly units because suitable local facilities do not exist. Such placements do not usually accord with user and carer wishes.


1970 ◽  
Vol 39 (135) ◽  
pp. 245-250
Author(s):  
B K Suvedi

The indicators mentioned in the Annual Report of Department of Health Services of Nepal has beenreviewed and analyzed. The Annual Report mentions 74 indicators used by 12 different programs under theDepartment of Health Services. Out of 26 programs, Fourteen (54%) programs do not have any indicators.Of the total 74 indicators used by 12 programs, only 28 (38%) have been used in the annual report fordetailed description. Three categories of the indicators have been classified and their use in the report hasbeen analyzed. Questions are raised regarding the "silent" programs and the "silent" indicators for their usein monitoring of performance / trend analysis of various programs. Suggestions on the better use of theindicators has been made.Key Words: indicators, health, programs, Nepal, report.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document