Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3143
C. Broadbent, S. Christmas, S. Walker
{"title":"Engaging people at highest risk of an asthma attack","authors":"C. Broadbent, S. Christmas, S. Walker","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3143","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3143","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"179 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115976222","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3137
Helmy Haja Mydin, S. Ampikaipakan, Shahid Shayaa, M. Partridge
{"title":"The effect of an asthma awareness campaign on social media users.","authors":"Helmy Haja Mydin, S. Ampikaipakan, Shahid Shayaa, M. Partridge","doi":"10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3137","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115874953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3135
Hana Bartáková, M. Otáhal, V. Baca, J. Votruba
Introduction: An elementary knowledge of flexible bronchoscopy (FBSC) is required from anesthesiology and intensive care (AIC) physicians for the European Diploma of Intensive Care exam. Workshops for AIC physicians guided by pulmonologists are a reasonable form of education. Training on specially preserved cadaver is a good background for real bronchoscopy. Aim: Workshops "FBSC for AIC physicians" covered by the Czech Medical Council are organized by a team of pulmonologists and AIC specialists with experience of FBSC. It includes a hands-on videobronchoscopy on a cadaver preserved according to Prof. Thiel, keeping a native appearance of tissue suitable for the FBSC training. The participants complete a questionnaire maping their previous FBSC experience and impact of the workshop on their practise. Methods: Questionnaire e-mailed to alumni focused on impact of the workshop on their clinical practise and a need of their follow-up education Results: Nov. 2012 - Dec. 2015 we organized 12 FBSC workshops for 141 participants. From 98 questionnaires we obtained eg. following data: 77% of participants declare application of practical skills obtained in the workshop in their clinical practise,74% use the theoretical know-how, most of the participants appreciate balanced ratio of practical and theoretical syllabus, more than 90% expressed their wish to take a part in advanced training Conclusions: Education of AIC specialists is one of the possibility how to enlarge the pool of physicians performing FBSC on ICUs. Our workshops for AIC physicians are valuable particularly because of the hands-on training on specially preserved cadaver
{"title":"How to teach anesthesiologists and intensivists to perform bronchoscopy? Three years experience with practically directed workshops in the Czech Republic","authors":"Hana Bartáková, M. Otáhal, V. Baca, J. Votruba","doi":"10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3135","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3135","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: An elementary knowledge of flexible bronchoscopy (FBSC) is required from anesthesiology and intensive care (AIC) physicians for the European Diploma of Intensive Care exam. Workshops for AIC physicians guided by pulmonologists are a reasonable form of education. Training on specially preserved cadaver is a good background for real bronchoscopy. Aim: Workshops \"FBSC for AIC physicians\" covered by the Czech Medical Council are organized by a team of pulmonologists and AIC specialists with experience of FBSC. It includes a hands-on videobronchoscopy on a cadaver preserved according to Prof. Thiel, keeping a native appearance of tissue suitable for the FBSC training. The participants complete a questionnaire maping their previous FBSC experience and impact of the workshop on their practise. Methods: Questionnaire e-mailed to alumni focused on impact of the workshop on their clinical practise and a need of their follow-up education Results: Nov. 2012 - Dec. 2015 we organized 12 FBSC workshops for 141 participants. From 98 questionnaires we obtained eg. following data: 77% of participants declare application of practical skills obtained in the workshop in their clinical practise,74% use the theoretical know-how, most of the participants appreciate balanced ratio of practical and theoretical syllabus, more than 90% expressed their wish to take a part in advanced training Conclusions: Education of AIC specialists is one of the possibility how to enlarge the pool of physicians performing FBSC on ICUs. Our workshops for AIC physicians are valuable particularly because of the hands-on training on specially preserved cadaver","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"326 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122640317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3142
E. Jackson, Keith J. Johnson, S. Dermer, R. Panettieri
Rationale: The objective of this study was to assess knowledge, competence and attitudes among pulmonologists and allergists regarding management of severe asthma. Methods: A continuing medical education (CME)-certified program consisting of 26 multiple-choice and Likert-scale questions derived from 2017 GINA recommendations (Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention, 2017. Available from www.ginasthma.org) and literature, was hosted on the Medscape Education website. Participant responses were collected from June 29 to August 1, 2017. Confidentiality was maintained and responses were de-identified and aggregated prior to analyses. Results: 161 pulmonologists and 71 allergists participated. 58% of pulmonologists/75% of allergists self-reported high to very high levels of confidence in using guideline-based algorithms for treatment selection; yet only 35% of pulmonologists/51% of allergists are as confident in using asthma biomarkers. Assessing adherence to therapy is a first step for 83% of pulmonologists/75% of allergists in addressing poorly controlled symptoms; yet fewer than one-half of pulmonologists (44%) and allergists (45%) report assessing patient inhaler technique at each visit. 81% of pulmonologists/79% of allergists were unaware of detailed mechanisms of action regarding IL-5 targeted biologics. Fewer than one-half of clinicians assess asthma symptoms using a validated measurement scale at every visit; greater than one-quarter report using clinical impressions alone. Conclusion: Significant gaps regarding expert-recommended practices in severe asthma were identified among both groups. Educational interventions tailored to specific needs are warranted to address these gaps.
{"title":"Assessment of Severe Asthma Management Practices among Pulmonologists and Allergists","authors":"E. Jackson, Keith J. Johnson, S. Dermer, R. Panettieri","doi":"10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3142","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3142","url":null,"abstract":"Rationale: The objective of this study was to assess knowledge, competence and attitudes among pulmonologists and allergists regarding management of severe asthma. Methods: A continuing medical education (CME)-certified program consisting of 26 multiple-choice and Likert-scale questions derived from 2017 GINA recommendations (Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention, 2017. Available from www.ginasthma.org) and literature, was hosted on the Medscape Education website. Participant responses were collected from June 29 to August 1, 2017. Confidentiality was maintained and responses were de-identified and aggregated prior to analyses. Results: 161 pulmonologists and 71 allergists participated. 58% of pulmonologists/75% of allergists self-reported high to very high levels of confidence in using guideline-based algorithms for treatment selection; yet only 35% of pulmonologists/51% of allergists are as confident in using asthma biomarkers. Assessing adherence to therapy is a first step for 83% of pulmonologists/75% of allergists in addressing poorly controlled symptoms; yet fewer than one-half of pulmonologists (44%) and allergists (45%) report assessing patient inhaler technique at each visit. 81% of pulmonologists/79% of allergists were unaware of detailed mechanisms of action regarding IL-5 targeted biologics. Fewer than one-half of clinicians assess asthma symptoms using a validated measurement scale at every visit; greater than one-quarter report using clinical impressions alone. Conclusion: Significant gaps regarding expert-recommended practices in severe asthma were identified among both groups. Educational interventions tailored to specific needs are warranted to address these gaps.","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121121492","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3144
C. Broadbent, P. Pfeffer, L. Steed, S. Walker
The toxic side effects of oral corticosteroids (OCS) have long been recognised. The need to show effectiveness of new, expensive, potentially steroid-sparing biological therapies for severe asthma requires objective measurement of steroid-induced complications. Existing questionnaires do not capture the myriad adverse effects on quality of life of corticosteroids such as agitation or poor sleep. To inform the development of a new OCS side effects questionnaire, we sought the views of people with asthma who had taken OCS. An online survey hosted on SurveyMonkey was shared with Asthma UK’s patient network through Facebook (>70k), Twitter (>39k) and the supporter mailing list (>80k). The survey asked people to report their experience of any of 29 symptoms collated from clinical and patient experience, and to report other side-effects not listed. 1,210 people with self-reported asthma responded, 92.5% of whom were on a daily dose of OCS or had had ≥2 asthma attacks requiring OCS in the previous year. The table below shows the 10 most frequently selected side effects and the percentage of respondents who selected each. These findings illustrate the impact of OCS on people with asthma. Results have been used to inform the development of a new side effects questionnaire for use in severe asthma services. It is important that patient-reported side effects are incorporated to fully evaluate clinical effectiveness.
{"title":"Patient-reported side effects of oral corticosteroids","authors":"C. Broadbent, P. Pfeffer, L. Steed, S. Walker","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3144","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3144","url":null,"abstract":"The toxic side effects of oral corticosteroids (OCS) have long been recognised. The need to show effectiveness of new, expensive, potentially steroid-sparing biological therapies for severe asthma requires objective measurement of steroid-induced complications. Existing questionnaires do not capture the myriad adverse effects on quality of life of corticosteroids such as agitation or poor sleep. To inform the development of a new OCS side effects questionnaire, we sought the views of people with asthma who had taken OCS. An online survey hosted on SurveyMonkey was shared with Asthma UK’s patient network through Facebook (>70k), Twitter (>39k) and the supporter mailing list (>80k). The survey asked people to report their experience of any of 29 symptoms collated from clinical and patient experience, and to report other side-effects not listed. 1,210 people with self-reported asthma responded, 92.5% of whom were on a daily dose of OCS or had had ≥2 asthma attacks requiring OCS in the previous year. The table below shows the 10 most frequently selected side effects and the percentage of respondents who selected each.\u0000 These findings illustrate the impact of OCS on people with asthma. Results have been used to inform the development of a new side effects questionnaire for use in severe asthma services. It is important that patient-reported side effects are incorporated to fully evaluate clinical effectiveness.","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"262 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115953632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.oa1642
C. Lombardi, M. Bonini, G. Passalacqua
{"title":"The role of mobile apps in allergic respiratory diseases: an italian survey report","authors":"C. Lombardi, M. Bonini, G. Passalacqua","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.oa1642","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.oa1642","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132845609","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3141
E. Jackson, Keith J. Johnson, S. Dermer, F. Martinez
Rationale: Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) COPD in 2017 recommended several important changes regarding assessment of exacerbation risk and selection of pharmacotherapy (Vogelmeier CF et al, Am J Respr Crit Care Med 2017;195(5):557-582). The objective of this study was to assess knowledge, competence and attitudes among pulmonologists and primary care providers (PCPs) regarding the interpretation of these recommendations using case-based scenarios. Methods: A continuing medical education (CME)-certified program consisting of 26 multiple-choice questions derived from GOLD 2017 recommendations, was hosted on the Medscape Education website. Participant responses were collected from July 25 to August 20, 2017. Confidentiality was maintained and responses were de-identified and aggregated prior to analyses. Findings: 209 pulmonologists and 220 PCPs participated. 51% of pulmonologists and 81% of PCPs were unaware that GOLD 2017 no longer considers lung function for staging and treatment selection. For a mild COPD case, 33% of pulmonologists and 33% of PCPs chose no pharmacotherapy. For moderate-severe COPD, 35% of pulmonologists and 39% of PCPs would consider ICS use outside of GOLD recommendations; 38% of pulmonologists and 46% of PCPs would maintain triple therapy in a symptomatic exacerbation-free patient versus a de-escalation strategy. Conclusion: Significant gaps regarding GOLD 2017 recommended practices were identified among both groups. Educational interventions tailored to specific needs are warranted to address these gaps.
理由:2017年全球慢性阻塞性肺疾病倡议(GOLD) COPD建议在评估恶化风险和药物治疗选择方面进行几项重要更改(Vogelmeier CF等，Am J Respr Crit Care Med 2017;195(5):557-582)。本研究的目的是评估肺科医生和初级保健提供者(pcp)在使用基于病例的情景解释这些建议方面的知识、能力和态度。方法:持续医学教育(CME)认证项目由26个多项选择题组成，这些选择题来源于GOLD 2017推荐，并在Medscape education网站上进行。参与者的回复于2017年7月25日至8月20日收集。保密并在分析前对回复进行去识别和汇总。结果:209名肺科医生和220名pcp参与。51%的肺科医生和81%的pcp不知道GOLD 2017在分期和治疗选择中不再考虑肺功能。对于轻度COPD病例，33%的肺科医生和33%的pcp不选择药物治疗。对于中重度COPD, 35%的肺科医生和39%的pcp会考虑在GOLD建议之外使用ICS;38%的肺科医生和46%的pcp会在无症状加重的患者中维持三联疗法，而不是降级策略。结论:两组在GOLD 2017推荐实践方面存在显著差异。有必要针对具体需要采取教育干预措施，以解决这些差距。
{"title":"Comparison of COPD Management Practices with Expert Recommendations among Pulmonologists and Primary Care Providers","authors":"E. Jackson, Keith J. Johnson, S. Dermer, F. Martinez","doi":"10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3141","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3141","url":null,"abstract":"Rationale: Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) COPD in 2017 recommended several important changes regarding assessment of exacerbation risk and selection of pharmacotherapy (Vogelmeier CF et al, Am J Respr Crit Care Med 2017;195(5):557-582). The objective of this study was to assess knowledge, competence and attitudes among pulmonologists and primary care providers (PCPs) regarding the interpretation of these recommendations using case-based scenarios. Methods: A continuing medical education (CME)-certified program consisting of 26 multiple-choice questions derived from GOLD 2017 recommendations, was hosted on the Medscape Education website. Participant responses were collected from July 25 to August 20, 2017. Confidentiality was maintained and responses were de-identified and aggregated prior to analyses. Findings: 209 pulmonologists and 220 PCPs participated. 51% of pulmonologists and 81% of PCPs were unaware that GOLD 2017 no longer considers lung function for staging and treatment selection. For a mild COPD case, 33% of pulmonologists and 33% of PCPs chose no pharmacotherapy. For moderate-severe COPD, 35% of pulmonologists and 39% of PCPs would consider ICS use outside of GOLD recommendations; 38% of pulmonologists and 46% of PCPs would maintain triple therapy in a symptomatic exacerbation-free patient versus a de-escalation strategy. Conclusion: Significant gaps regarding GOLD 2017 recommended practices were identified among both groups. Educational interventions tailored to specific needs are warranted to address these gaps.","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125519468","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3132
T. Lugovkina, T. Tulkova, S. Skornyakov, I. Medvinskiy, E. Egorov
{"title":"Conceptualization of the clinical diagnosis components for digital coding in structured electronic data-bases of phthisiopulmonology.","authors":"T. Lugovkina, T. Tulkova, S. Skornyakov, I. Medvinskiy, E. Egorov","doi":"10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3132","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.CONGRESS-2018.PA3132","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123613551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.oa1641
P. Napora, Sylwia Szromba, P. Napora
Introduction: Respipedia is a peer-reviewed medical wiki on respiratory medicine now open to the public having been on line from July 2015 with 66 articles in different stage of development, 129 contributors and average 3,3 edition monthly for lasy six months (Feb 2018). Aims and objectives: To compare two web based educational projects one succesful and one unsuccesful with Respipedia for determining its future and to propose possible improvements. Methods: Review of literature was preformed. Two widely analised projects were chosen one succesful (Wikipedia) and one unsuccesful (Nupedia). Both were compared to Respipedia. Results: Following problems were identified: (1) lack of clear target audience (common public, medical professionals, respiratory specialists) (2) low number of contributing authors (3) lack of clear authorship status (4) lack of clear revison status Conclusion: Opening for medical professionals willing to edit as a volunteers, preserving position of reviewers for ERS members seems to be essential. Introducing audit trail feature and visible reviewed status will allow to clear authorship and quality status of every article version. Publishing best articles considered as a "state of art" in indexed medical journal with impact factor should provide the pressure for quality.
{"title":"Comparative analysis of Respipedia, Nupedia and Wikipedia. Is it possible for Respipedia to avoid Nupedia's fate?","authors":"P. Napora, Sylwia Szromba, P. Napora","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.oa1641","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.oa1641","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Respipedia is a peer-reviewed medical wiki on respiratory medicine now open to the public having been on line from July 2015 with 66 articles in different stage of development, 129 contributors and average 3,3 edition monthly for lasy six months (Feb 2018). Aims and objectives: To compare two web based educational projects one succesful and one unsuccesful with Respipedia for determining its future and to propose possible improvements. Methods: Review of literature was preformed. Two widely analised projects were chosen one succesful (Wikipedia) and one unsuccesful (Nupedia). Both were compared to Respipedia. Results: Following problems were identified: (1) lack of clear target audience (common public, medical professionals, respiratory specialists) (2) low number of contributing authors (3) lack of clear authorship status (4) lack of clear revison status Conclusion: Opening for medical professionals willing to edit as a volunteers, preserving position of reviewers for ERS members seems to be essential. Introducing audit trail feature and visible reviewed status will allow to clear authorship and quality status of every article version. Publishing best articles considered as a \"state of art\" in indexed medical journal with impact factor should provide the pressure for quality.","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116251833","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-15DOI: 10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3146
Ashwini Dhumal, M. Barne, S. Madas, S. Jadhav, J. Londhe, Madhuragauri Shevade, B. Ghosh, Noopur Hedawoo, Dilip D. Kadam, S. Meshram, A. Chandanwale, S. Khadse, S. Salvi
{"title":"Do medical and nursing students know correct use of Inhalers? Results of UPSIDE India study","authors":"Ashwini Dhumal, M. Barne, S. Madas, S. Jadhav, J. Londhe, Madhuragauri Shevade, B. Ghosh, Noopur Hedawoo, Dilip D. Kadam, S. Meshram, A. Chandanwale, S. Khadse, S. Salvi","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2018.pa3146","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":228043,"journal":{"name":"Medical education, web and internet","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116506854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：