Questões de Inglês - Artigos | Articles para Concurso

A recent study, performed with children aged 2 months to 10 years, produced clinicai evidence delineating the stages a child goes through in developing a self-image. It involved exposing the child to his reflection in both a true mirror and then one that was convexly distorted. Children from 9 to 10 months old were highly responsive to both the true and the distorted mirror images. Their excitement, attention, and activity seemed to be unaffected by the distortion, indicating they had no self-image. Slightly older children, aged 10 to 11 months, made rhythmic circular movements when exposed to their distorted image as though attempting to correct the distortion. This change in response indicates the child may have some idea of his image and perhaps recognizes the distorted image is wrong. Amarked change in response changes when a child reaches 18 to 22 months of age. The child avoids both images, having begun to develop a self-image which does not match the mirror image. From 2 to 5 years, the child has developed a definite self-image which is recognizable in the mirror, since the child literally flees the distorted image. Children ages 7 to 10 had reached a levei of cognitive development which allowed them to laugh at the distorted images, play with the mirror and observe the changes they could effect.

                                                                                                                       Crescer magazine 1992

05/01/2012

Understand legal issues when using CBCT scans

by Stuart J. Oberman, USA

      Dentists are legally and ethically obligated to do no harm to their patients. Improper diagnosis after using a CBCT (cone-beam computed tomography) does not align with this standard because delay of diagnosis leads to delay of treatment. This is not in the best interest of the patient because it can lead to an inferior prognosis. Also, not every patient requires a CBCT scan; therefore, it is the dentist’s responsibility to determine whether a CBCT scan is necessary by using reasonable, careful judgment in light of the patient’s medical and dental history and thorough examination. The dentist should do a cost-benefit analysis before requesting a CBCT scan. When doing so, the dentist should consider whether the likely benefit to the patient exceeds the ionizing radiation risk and the financial cost.

Dentists’ scope of legal responsibility to diagnose

      When using CBCT, as with other diagnostic tools, the dentist’s responsibility is not limited to the area of interest being diagnosed or treated. The treating dentist is legally responsible for diagnosing any disease that falls within the scope of the dentist’s license, which is normally broad in scope, encompassing all diseases and lesions of the jaw and related structures. As for a dentist’s responsibility for diagnosing a disease that falls outside the scope of the dentist’s license, the answer is not clear. Thus, it is always a good idea to be cautious and assume the responsibility to recognize any abnormality that appears anywhere on the CBCT scan. If ...ART 1... dentist is unsure of ...ART 2... scan results, he or she should consult with ...ART 3... specialists in the field or refer ...ART 4... patient to ...ART 5... specialist.  

Neglect contributed to death of patient at community hospital

16 August 2012 | By Sarah Calkin

      A patient who choked to death at a hospital run by Somerset Partnership Foundation Trust had been neglected by staff, a coroner has ruled.

      Parkinson’s sufferer Diana Mansfield, 78, was struggling to swallow during her stay at Frome Community Hospital in September 2011. On 3 September she choked and died. East Somerset coroner Tony Williams found ..ART1... primary cause of death was ....ART2... acute upper airway obstruction and dysphagia, ...ART3... common side effect of Parkinson’s.

      Following the inquest in July he identified failings made in the nursing care received by Ms Mansfield and recorded a verdict of accidental death aggravated by neglect.

      The Care Quality Commission visited the 28-bed hospital earlier this year in response to concerns about care and welfare of patients and staffing levels arising from Ms Mansfield’s death.

      Inspectors judged the hospital was meeting standards overall. .....CONECTIVO.... it raised minor concerns about staffing levels, noting the ward had a sickness absence rate of nearly 10 per cent and cover was not always available for absent staff for a whole shift.

      The full staffing establishment on the 12-bed ward where Ms Mansfield stayed was three registered nurses and four healthcare assistants on the early shift and five staff - usually two nurses and three HCAs - on the late shift. Some nurses complained this was not always adequate to meet the needs of patients and said it was sometimes a struggle to complete all their tasks.