Kenneth S. Yew

A Systematic Process to Prioritize Prevention Activities: Sustaining Progress Toward the Reduction of Military Injuries

BACKGROUND To sustain progress toward injury reduction and other health promotion goals, public health organizations need a systematic approach based on data and an evaluation of existing scientific evidence on prevention. This paper describes a process and criteria developed to systematically and objectively define prevention program and policy priorities. METHODS Military medical surveillance data were obtained and summarized, and a working group of epidemiology and injury experts was formed. After reviewing the available data, the working group used predefined criteria to score leading military unintentional injury causes on five main criteria that assessed factors contributing to program and policy success: (1) importance of the problem, (2) effectiveness of existing prevention strategies, (3) feasibility of establishing programs and policies, (4) timeliness of implementation and results, and (5) potential for evaluation. Injury problems were ranked by total median score. RESULTS Causes with the highest total median scores were physical training (34 points), military parachuting (32 points), privately-owned vehicle crashes (31 points), sports (29 points), falls (27 points), and military vehicle crashes (27 points). CONCLUSIONS Using a data-driven, criteria-based process, three injury causes (physical training, military parachuting, and privately owned-vehicle crashes) with the greatest potential for successful program and policy implementation were identified. Such information is useful for public health practitioners and policymakers who must prioritize among health problems that are competing for limited resources. The process and criteria could be adapted to systematically assess and prioritize health issues affecting other communities.

Updating clinical knowledge: an evaluation of current information alerting services.

PURPOSE Clinicians are overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of new clinical information that is available on a daily basis. Despite the availability of information tools for finding this information and for updating clinical knowledge, no study has examined the quality of current information alerting services. METHODS We developed a 7-item checklist based on the principles of evidence-based medicine and assessed content validity with experts and face validity with practicing clinicians and clinician researchers. A list of clinical information updating tools (push tools) was generated in a systematic fashion and the checklist was used to rate the quality of these tools by two independent raters. Prior to rating all instruments, the raters were trained to achieve good agreement (>80%) by applying the checklist to two sets of three randomly selected tools. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the quality of the identified tools and inter-rater reliability was assessed using Intraclass Correlation (ICC). RESULTS Eighteen tools were identified using our systematic search. The average quality of these tools was 2.72 (range 0-7). Only two tools met all suggested criteria for quality. Inter-rater reliability for the 7-item checklist was .82 (ICC). CONCLUSIONS We developed a checklist that can be used to reliably assess the quality of clinical information updating tools. We found many shortcomings in currently available clinical knowledge updating tools. Ideally, these tools will evolve in the direction of applying basic evidence-based medicine principles to new medical information in order to increase their usefulness to clinicians.

Institutional support for handheld computing: clinical and educational lessons learned.

Handheld computing devices, or personal digital assistants (PDAs), are used often in the health care setting. They provide a convenient way to store and carry either personal or reference information and can be used to accomplish other tasks associated with patient care. This article reports clinical and educational lessons learned from a longitudinal institutional initiative designed to provide medical students with PDAs to facilitate patient care and assist with clinical learning.

A Systematic Process to Prioritize Prevention Activities

BACKGROUND To sustain progress toward injury reduction and other health promotion goals, public health organizations need a systematic approach based on data and an evaluation of existing scientific evidence on prevention. This paper describes a process and criteria developed to systematically and objectively define prevention program and policy priorities. METHODS Military medical surveillance data were obtained and summarized, and a working group of epidemiology and injury experts was formed. After reviewing the available data, the working group used predefined criteria to score leading military unintentional injury causes on five main criteria that assessed factors contributing to program and policy success: (1) importance of the problem, (2) effectiveness of existing prevention strategies, (3) feasibility of establishing programs and policies, (4) timeliness of implementation and results, and (5) potential for evaluation. Injury problems were ranked by total median score. RESULTS Causes with the highest total median scores were physical training (34 points), military parachuting (32 points), privately-owned vehicle crashes (31 points), sports (29 points), falls (27 points), and military vehicle crashes (27 points). CONCLUSIONS Using a data-driven, criteria-based process, three injury causes (physical training, military parachuting, and privately owned-vehicle crashes) with the greatest potential for successful program and policy implementation were identified. Such information is useful for public health practitioners and policymakers who must prioritize among health problems that are competing for limited resources. The process and criteria could be adapted to systematically assess and prioritize health issues affecting other communities.

Applications of evidence-based approaches to injury prevention prioritizationA Systematic Process to Prioritize Prevention Activities: Sustaining Progress Toward the Reduction of Military Injuries

BACKGROUND To sustain progress toward injury reduction and other health promotion goals, public health organizations need a systematic approach based on data and an evaluation of existing scientific evidence on prevention. This paper describes a process and criteria developed to systematically and objectively define prevention program and policy priorities. METHODS Military medical surveillance data were obtained and summarized, and a working group of epidemiology and injury experts was formed. After reviewing the available data, the working group used predefined criteria to score leading military unintentional injury causes on five main criteria that assessed factors contributing to program and policy success: (1) importance of the problem, (2) effectiveness of existing prevention strategies, (3) feasibility of establishing programs and policies, (4) timeliness of implementation and results, and (5) potential for evaluation. Injury problems were ranked by total median score. RESULTS Causes with the highest total median scores were physical training (34 points), military parachuting (32 points), privately-owned vehicle crashes (31 points), sports (29 points), falls (27 points), and military vehicle crashes (27 points). CONCLUSIONS Using a data-driven, criteria-based process, three injury causes (physical training, military parachuting, and privately owned-vehicle crashes) with the greatest potential for successful program and policy implementation were identified. Such information is useful for public health practitioners and policymakers who must prioritize among health problems that are competing for limited resources. The process and criteria could be adapted to systematically assess and prioritize health issues affecting other communities.