Hayes Potter (fridayzebra9)

07; DF = 1; P = .80) and overall aortic related complications (χ2 = 1.25; DF = 1; P = .26); however, aortic graft infection was more frequent in IAAA group (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS Open repair of IAAA is challenging and comparing to AAA carries a higher perioperative risk and long-term infection rate, even in high-volume centers. Sotrastaurin manufacturer The main causes of complications are intraoperative injury of adjacent organs, bleeding, and coronary events. Patients with AAA in a matched cohort showed equal long-term survival, which should be assessed in bigger registries. BACKGROUND The Evidence-based Practice Confidence (EPIC) scale is a self-report questionnaire for health professionals. The EPIC scale was developed in Canada and is based on Bandura's self-efficacy theory. It comprises 11 statements on the organization and implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) steps. The aim of the study was to translate the EPIC scale into German, to test its comprehensibility in German-speaking countries and to interculturally adapt the scale. METHODS The translation process followed international guidelines. After two independent translations into German and two independent back translations had been conducted, an expert committee discussed discrepancies in view of intercultural comprehensibility and agreed on a preliminary German version. The comprehensibility of this version was evaluated with physical therapists from Switzerland, Austria and Germany. They were recruited using purposeful sampling and interviewed via telephone using a semi-structured questionnaire (cognitive inhe scale evaluates self-efficacy in EBP activities and could potentially be used to assess courses or be integrated into surveys. In the next step, the validity and reliability of the German scale should be established involving other health care professionals in this process. BACKGROUND Although the role of general practice has been strengthened in recent years, undergraduate teaching at medical schools and the clinical phase of specialist training remain dominated by specialized care of seriously ill people in hospitals. It is to be assumed that young doctors' views on medical care are strongly shaped by this clinical focus. OBJECTIVE To investigate how young general practitioners (GPs) perceive transition from medical school and hospital work to general practice. METHODS In a qualitative study, a total of 13 physicians in specialist training for general practice as well as general practitioners who had completed their specialist examination up to two years ago participated in problem-oriented interviews. The interviews were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS The significant differences between hospital-based and primary care practice initially came as quite a shock to the study participants. Key differences and challenges compared to working in a hospital included 1) the totally different sort of patients or complaints they faced; 2) learning that in many situations one can and should bide one's time ("wait-and-see" approach); 3) ruling out avoidable dangerous developments in patients reliably and coping with the corresponding residual risk; 4) the discovery that sometimes it makes sense not to make a diagnosis; 5) that the doctor-patient relationship should be more cooperative in general practice; and 6) that GPs are often under pressure to act although there is no clear need for taking action or no clear treatment option from a medical and scientific point of view. CONCLUSIONS Our findings confirm that young doctors' initial views on medical care are strongly shaped by the clinical focus of medical schools and hospital work. Working in general practice is perceived as being very different from working in a hospital. With powerful new therapies available for management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), early diagnosis leading to appropriate treatment may prevent long-term structural joint damage. Alth