To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Academic health sciences libraries (“libraries”) offer services that span the entire research lifecycle, positioning them as natural partners in advancing clinical and translational science. Many libraries enjoy active and productive collaborations with Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program hubs and other translational initiatives like the IDeA Clinical & Translational Research Network. This article explores areas of potential partnership between libraries and Translational Science Hubs (TSH), highlighting areas where libraries can support the CTSA Program’s five functional areas outlined in the Notice of Funding Opportunity. It serves as a primer for TSH and libraries to explore potential collaborations, demonstrating how libraries can connect researchers to services and resources that support the information needs of TSH.
To study the airflow, transmission, and clearance of aerosols in the clinical spaces of a hospital ward that had been used to care for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to examine the impact of portable air cleaners on aerosol clearance.
Design:
Observational study.
Setting:
A single ward of a tertiary-care public hospital in Melbourne, Australia.
Intervention:
Glycerin-based aerosol was used as a surrogate for respiratory aerosols. The transmission of aerosols from a single patient room into corridors and a nurses’ station in the ward was measured. The rate of clearance of aerosols was measured over time from the patient room, nurses’ station and ward corridors with and without air cleaners [ie, portable high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters].
Results:
Aerosols rapidly travelled from the patient room into other parts of the ward. Air cleaners were effective in increasing the clearance of aerosols from the air in clinical spaces and reducing their spread to other areas. With 2 small domestic air cleaners in a single patient room of a hospital ward, 99% of aerosols could be cleared within 5.5 minutes.
Conclusions:
Air cleaners may be useful in clinical spaces to help reduce the risk of acquisition of respiratory viruses that are transmitted via aerosols. They are easy to deploy and are likely to be cost-effective in a variety of healthcare settings.
Consumer health organisations (CHOs), which operate outside the mainstream healthcare system with a specific focus on supporting people to self-manage their health conditions, have become widespread. Yet, there has been little systematic research into CHOs, including their perceived benefits and barriers, which encourage or deter their access by people with a variety of chronic health conditions.
Aim
This study explored the benefits of CHOs in self-management and also the barriers that inhibit their access, from the perspective of people with chronic conditions and their unpaid carers.
Methods
In-depth, semi-structured interviews were completed with 97 participants across four regions of Australia. The sample included a high representation of people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as well as non-indigenous Australians.
Findings
Three inter-related themes were identified that represented the benefits of involvement and participation in CHOs: knowledge and information, connection and support and experiential learning. However, limited access pathways emerged as a barrier that inhibited a person’s entry into CHOs. Furthermore, the person’s beliefs and experiences about their own health condition(s) also inhibited their continued participation in CHO programmes.
Conclusion
Although our findings confirm that CHOs are a valuable resource in alleviating the ‘work of being a patient’ for some people, there seems to be some barriers that prevent their full access and utilisation. Structured integration systems to increase the reliable delivery and accessibility of CHOs are needed to ensure that people who would benefit from accessing them can do so.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.