Objective To survey the present situation of medical equipment configuration of township hospitals in Shuangliu County, to provide baseline data for the next step of discussing the well-off township hospital medical equipment configuration standards. Methods According to the national guidance on device configuration in township hospitals, the questionnaire was made to survey 24 county township medical units (i.e. 3 central township hospitals, 3 community health centers, and 18 general township hospitals). The descriptive and stratified analysis was performed for the survey results. Results The condition of medical equipment configuration in the 3 central hospitals was better than that in the 3 community health centers which was better than that in the 18 general hospitals. The emergency equipment configuration such as defibrillator units, breathing airbags, and tracheotomy package was poor. Annual inspection rate of medical metering equipment was lower than expectation. In 2010, a total of 127 medical measuring equipments from 98.5% of the township hospitals applied annual inspection, among which, only the total annual rate of black and white B ultrasonic and X-ray machine reached above 60%; the rate of blood cells analyzer, ECG monitoring instrument, and biochemical analyzer were between 50% to 60%; and the rate of urine analyzer was the lowest at 4.5%. Conclusion It is the right time to strengthen the first aid equipment configuration in township hospitals and to enhance the annual inspection rate of the medical measuring equipment, so that the safety use and accuracy detecting can be guaranteed.
The original meaning of “allocation concealment” is that the statistician and the trial designer who generated the random sequence and allocation sequence should not recruit and allocate the participants for the purpose of avoiding selection bias. In the process of generating allocation sequence, combined blinding measures are so called “setting blinding”, for instance, by using “double simulation”. We use a example to describe how to perform an adequate allocation and conceal the sequence, and setting blinding. Another example is used to describe how to report the methods of randomization, allocation concealment and the effect of blinding, etc.
Random allocation to intervention groups remains the best method of ensuring that the groups being compared are similar at the onset of study and of avoiding removing selection bias between groups of patients. The success of randomization depends on two interrelated processes. First, an unpredictable allocation sequence must be generated based on a random procedure. Second, strict implementation of that sequence must be secured through an assignment mechanism called allocation concealment to prevent those involved in a trial from knowing upcoming assignments. Inadequate allocation concealment can lead to clinicians scheduling patient’s assignment and compromising the unpredictable allocation sequence.
Objective ① To document the way in which allocation concealment is described and coded for studies included in Cochrane Reviews.②To feed back any gaps or miscodings to individual review groups.③ To suggest changes and expansions to advice on how to code and describe allocation concealment methods.Methods The coding and description of methods of allocation concealment for studies included in all 1 596 reviews on issue 1, 2003 of The Cochrane Library are being extracted.So far results are available for 10.8% (173/1 596) of reviews containing 1 844 studies, from 10 Collaborative Review Groups (CRGs).Discrepancies, and inconsistencies with the Cochrane Reviewers’ Handbook, are being documented and analysed.Results The current coding of the adequacy of allocation concealment in studies included in Cochrane reviews is not likely to be very accurate.This is due to failure to describe methods of allocation concealment (38.6% of the sample of 1 844 studies) as well as miscoding (at least an additional 9.2%).The most common method for studies coded A was some variation of envelope use (133/675-19.7% of all A codes). The most common "method" for studies coded B was method unclear or not described in the report of the study (426/665, 64% of all B codes).Conclusions Since adequate allocation concealment is so important in protecting against bias in randomised controlled trials, it needs to be accurately coded and described.We need to improve how this is done for studies included in Cochrane Reviews.Since over half the studies coded as D were likely to have been where reviewers omitted to enter a code, the default should be changed from D to "code not supplied".Structural changes to RevMan are suggested-ideally the addition of a separate new study quality assessment table with fixed headings as well as the facility to enter free text.Suggestions for improving coding in particular reviews will be fed back to CRGs in the next stages of this project.Suggestions for additions to the Cochrane Reviewers’ Handbook are also made.
ObjectiveTo investigate the status and problems of facility allocation in 22 health service centers and township health centers in Fucheng District of Mianyang city, in order to provide references for improving health services in these medical units. MethodsAccording to the national guidance of facility configuration in township hospitals, the questionnaire was made to survey on the allocation of medical facilities, durable years and frequency of use in 22 medical units of Fucheng district (11 urban community health service centers and 11 township health centers) from November to December 2010. The descriptive and stratified analysis was performed for the survey results. ResultsMost equipment and facilities required in "Guide Criteria for Installation of Equipment and Facilities in Urban Community Health Service Centers" including facilities for diagnosis, treatment and health education were not installed and there were problems of poor property and low frequency of use. The medical equipment was seriously inadequate in 11 township health centers. ConclusionCommunity basic equipment resource should be improved as soon as possible.
ObjectiveTo analyze the current status of the application of randomization methods in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which have been published in New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).MethodsRCTs published by NEJM in 2018 were searched and collected. The characteristics of clinical trial design elements and the application status of randomization methods were comprehensively analyzed to distinguish blind trial and non-blind trial, and characteristics of application of randomization methods and selection of allocation concealment mechanisms of non-blind trials were summarized.ResultsA total of 151 RCTs were published in NEJM in 2018, in which blinded trials and non-blinded trials accounted for 75 (49.67%) and 76 (50.33%), respectively. 34 (22.52%) RCTs did not report specific randomization methods, and the remaining 117 (77.48%) reported. Among the latter, stratified block randomization accounted for the main body (72.65%), followed by block randomization (11.11%), minimization method (9.40%), simple randomization method (4.27%) and the others. There was no significant difference in the proportion of reporting or using randomization methods between blind and non-blind trials (P>0.05). In 76 non-blind trials, 38 (50.00%) clearly reported the concealment method of random allocation, among which 37 used the central randomization (97.37%) and 1 used envelope method (2.63%).ConclusionsThe current RCTs published in NEJM still have problems in the selection of randomization methods to be optimized and the transparency of randomization reporting to be improved.