University of Alabama at Birmingham

About: University of Alabama at Birmingham is a education organization based out in Birmingham, Alabama, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 38523 authors who have published 86775 publications receiving 3930642 citations. The organization is also known as: UAB & The University of Alabama at Birmingham.

Quantitation of nitrotyrosine levels in lung sections of patients and animals with acute lung injury.

Abstract: Activated alveolar macrophages and epithelial type II cells release both nitric oxide and superoxide which react at near diffusion-limited rate (6.7 x 10(9) M-1s-1) to form peroxynitrite, a potent oxidant capable of damaging the alveolar epithelium and pulmonary surfactant. Peroxynitrite, but not nitric oxide or superoxide, readily nitrates phenolic rings including tyrosine. We quantified the presence of nitrotyrosine in the lungs of patients with the adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and in the lungs of rats exposed to hyperoxia (100% O2 for 60 h) using quantitative immunofluorescence. Fresh frozen or paraffin-embedded lung sections were incubated with a polyclonal antibody to nitrotyrosine, followed by goat anti-rabbit IgG coupled to rhodamine. Sections from patients with ARDS (n = 5), or from rats exposed to hyperoxia (n = 4), exhibited a twofold increase of specific binding over controls. This binding was blocked by the addition of an excess amount of nitrotyrosine and was absent when the nitrotyrosine antibody was replaced with nonimmune IgG. In additional experiments we demonstrated nitrotyrosine formation in rat lung sections incubated in vitro with peroxynitrite, but not nitric oxide or reactive oxygen species. These data suggest that toxic levels of peroxynitrite may be formed in the lungs of patients with acute lung injury.

Benefits and drawbacks of electronic health record systems

Abstract: The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of 2009 that was signed into law as part of the “stimulus package” represents the largest US initiative to date that is designed to encourage widespread use of electronic health records (EHRs). In light of the changes anticipated from this policy initiative, the purpose of this paper is to review and summarize the literature on the benefits and drawbacks of EHR systems. Much of the literature has focused on key EHR functionalities, including clinical decision support systems, computerized order entry systems, and health information exchange. Our paper describes the potential benefits of EHRs that include clinical outcomes (eg, improved quality, reduced medical errors), organizational outcomes (eg, financial and operational benefits), and societal outcomes (eg, improved ability to conduct research, improved population health, reduced costs). Despite these benefits, studies in the literature highlight drawbacks associated with EHRs, which include the high upfront acquisition costs, ongoing maintenance costs, and disruptions to workflows that contribute to temporary losses in productivity that are the result of learning a new system. Moreover, EHRs are associated with potential perceived privacy concerns among patients, which are further addressed legislatively in the HITECH Act. Overall, experts and policymakers believe that significant benefits to patients and society can be realized when EHRs are widely adopted and used in a “meaningful” way.

Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy: An Endocrine Society Scientific Statement

Abstract: Objective: Our objective was to provide a scholarly review of the published literature on menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT), make scientifically valid assessments of the available data, and grade the level of evidence available for each clinically important endpoint. Participants in Development of Scientific Statement: The 12-member Scientific Statement Task Force of The Endocrine Society selected the leader of the statement development group (R.J.S.) and suggested experts with expertise in specific areas. In conjunction with the Task Force, lead authors (n = 25) and peer reviewers (n = 14) for each specific topic were selected. All discussions regarding content and grading of evidence occurred via teleconference or electronic and written correspondence. No funding was provided to any expert or peer reviewer, and all participants volunteered their time to prepare this Scientific Statement. Evidence: Each expert conducted extensive literature searches of case control, cohort, and randomized controlled tria...