Access evidence based Dermatology topics via UpToDate

UpToDate content now covers all the major areas of dermatology, including medical dermatology, paediatric dermatology and procedural dermatology.  UpToDate’s graphics search also allows you to search for and download a range of dermatology images.

What is UpToDate?

UpToDate provides you with a summary of the latest evidence in your specialty or area of interest. It can be used as a tool to help you answer clinical questions quickly, increase your clinical knowledge, and improve patient care. A topic summary provides you with a synthesis of the literature, the latest evidence, and specific recommendations for patient care.

How can I access UpToDate?

You can access UpToDate via the WUTH intranet (click on the ‘UpToDate’ link in the Clinical box) or via www.uptodate.com with your Athens account.

Dermatology topics include:

·         Acne and rosacea
·         Bullous disease
·         Cosmetic dermatology
·         Cutaneous lymphoma
·         Dermatitis
·         Dermatologic diagnosis
·         Dermatologic surgery
·         Drug eruptions
·         Genodermatoses
·         Hair and scalp disease
·         Infections and infestations
·         Melanocytic lesions and disorders of pigmentation
·         Nonmelanoma skin cancer and related disorders
·         Other topics in dermatology
·         Papulosquamous disorders
·         Pediatric dermatology
·         Photodermatology
·         Skin and systemic disease
·         Urticaria and angioedema

You can register for an Athens account at www.evidence.nhs.uk.  For more information please contact the Integrated Library Service on extension 8610 or visit our webspages at www.whnt.nhs.uk/library. The library service can provide individual or group training on using UpToDate and a whole range of useful resources.  Please request training here.

Self Service Unit

Come and try our self service unit

Want to be able to borrow books at the weekend or late at night?

Want to return or renew materials?

Want to know what you have on loan and when the items are due back?

Try the self service unit today. Our friendly, helpful staff will show you how.

WUTH publication: Zinc induced damage to kidney proximal tubular cells: Studies on chemical speciation leading to a mechanism of damage.

Citation: Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology, 2013, 27(3), 242-8
Author: Sargazi M, Shenkin A, Roberts NB
Abstract: This study was carried out to investigate whether zinc can potentiate renal toxicity using monolayer cultures of kidney proximal tubular cells and if so to establish the chemical species and the mechanism involved. METHODS: Zinc was prepared as the citrate complex at pH 7.4 in phosphate buffered saline. Monolayers of kidney proximal tubular cells under standard cell culture conditions were exposed to zinc concentrations of 0, 5 10, 20, 50 and 100μmol/L. To assess cellular damage, thiazol blue (MTT) uptake, NAG and LDH release, DAPI staining and Tunel assay were used. Cytoprotective agents: trolox, cysteine, glutathione, ascorbic acid and sodium selenite were used to investigate if the damage was reversible. RESULTS: Incubation of kidney cells with zinc citrate showed a dose related reduction in cell viability (p<0.005) associated with cellular uptake of zinc ions. After 24h incubation with 100μmol/L Zn citrate, NAG release was not significantly different compared to the control whereas LDH increased 3 fold. DAPI staining showed apoptotic bodies within the cells confirmed by Tunel assay using flow cytometry. Electron microscopy showed significant morphological changes including loss of brush border, vacuolated cytoplasm and condensed nuclei. Trolox almost completely (>85±5%) and sodium selenite partially recovered (40±4%) the viability of cells exposed to Zn but no protection was observed with other cytoprotectants, e.g. glutathione, cysteine or ascorbic acid. In conclusion zinc can induce damage to kidney cells by a mechanism dependent on zinc ions entering the cell, binding to the cell organelles and disrupting cellular processes rather than damage initiated by free radical and ROS production.

Link to Pubmed record 

For more information about obtaining the full text of journal articles, please visit our Document / Book Supply service.

To view all WUTH publications please link here.

Final report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry (Francis report)

The final report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry, conducted by Robert Francis QC, was published on Wednesday 6 February 2013.  His Inquiry followed concerns about standards of care at the Trust, and an investigation and report published by the Healthcare Commission in March 2009.  Robert Francis has heard evidence from patients, their relatives and staff to inform his report and the 18 recommendations he makes.

Read the full report here.

The Guardian website gives a useful overview of the key recommendations from the report.

The Department of Health has published three reports to help embed effective governance and detect and prevent such serious failures occurring again: Review of Early Warning Systems in the NHS, Assuring the quality of senior NHS managers, The Healthy NHS Board.

Read the Care Quality Commission's response to the report here.

WUTH publication: Clinical outcomes of triamcinolone-assisted anterior vitrectomy after phacoemulsification complicated by posterior capsule rupture.

Citation: Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 2013, Jan 18
Author: Kasbekar S, Prasad S, Kumar BV
Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes in patients who had triamcinolone acetate-assisted anterior vitrectomy and patients who had anterior vitrectomy without triamcinolone acetate after phacoemulsification complicated by posterior capsule rupture and vitreous loss.
SETTING: Arrowe Park Hospital, Wirral, United Kingdom.
DESIGN: Retrospective consecutive case note review.
METHODS: Consecutive case notes of patients who had anterior vitrectomy assisted by triamcinolone acetonide (triamcinolone group) or without triamcinolone acetate (no-triamcinolone group) after posterior capsule rupture between January 2007 and January 2011 were identified and examined. Data recorded at the clinic visit preoperatively and 1 day and 3 months postoperatively were collated. Information recorded on the pro forma included visual acuity, ocular comorbidities, intraocular pressure (IOP), vitreous strands in the anterior chamber, and other adverse events.
RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found in the visual acuity or IOP between 17 patients in the triamcinolone group and 34 patients in the no-triamcinolone group at any time point. Vitreous strands in the anterior chamber were noted in 1 patient in the triamcinolone group and 7 patients in the no-triamcinolone group. Cystoid macular edema (CME) was present in 3 patients in the no-triamcinolone group, including 1 patient with vitreomacular traction.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant increase in IOP after triamcinolone acetate-assisted anterior vitrectomy. Higher rates of CME and residual anterior chamber vitreous strands in the no-triamcinolone acetate group support the clinical use of triamcinolone acetate.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Link to Pubmed record

For more information about obtaining the full text of journal articles, please visit our Document / Book Supply service.

To view all WUTH publications please link here

WUTH publication: Standardized definition of contamination and evidence-based target necessary for high-quality blood culture contamination rate audit.

Citation: Journal of Hospital Infection. 2013 Jan 9.
Author: Harvey DJ, Albert S

Link to Pubmed record

For more information about obtaining the full text of journal articles, please visit our Document / Book Supply service.

To view all WUTH publications please link here.

New LEAF bulletin available

There is a new LEAF bulletin available.

NHS Line Managers Bulletin - is a fortnightly bulletin from NHS Employers which gives managers in the NHS practical tips, tools and advice on key workforce issues.

WUTH publication: A systematic review on the use of prophylactic mesh during primary stoma formation to prevent parastomal hernia formation.

Citation: Colorectal Disease, 2012, 14(8), 931-6.
Author: Shabbir J, Chaudhary BN, Dawson R
Abstract: AIM: Despite advances in surgical technique, parastomal herniation is common. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy of prophylactic mesh at primary operation in reducing the incidence of parastomal hernia.
METHOD: Medline, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched for relevant publications between January 1980 and January 2010. The search strategy included text terms and MESH headings for parastomal hernia, mesh and prevention and/or prophylaxis of hernia. No language restrictions were applied. Bibliographies from the papers requested in full were manually checked. All randomized controlled trials were included regardless of the language of publication. Results were extracted from the papers by two observers independently on a predefined data sheet. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. REVMAN 5 was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Of 27 possible studies three randomized controlled trials fulfilled the criteria for systematic review, with a total of 128 patients (mesh 64, no mesh 64). The two study groups were well matched demographically. The incidence of parastomal hernia in the mesh group was 12.5% (8/64) compared with 53% (34/64) in the control group (P < 0.0001). There was no difference in mesh related morbidity in the two groups.
CONCLUSION: Although only three trials with 128 patients fulfilled the criteria for this systematic review, the data suggest that the use of prophylactic prosthetic mesh at the time of primary stoma formation reduces the incidence of parastomal hernia.

Link to Pubmed record 

Planning, Costing and Managing your Systematic Reviews (PaniCMaSteR)

Whether you are conducting commissioned research, a review for your PhD, or surveying methodological developments in your discipline, a major challenge is managing the logistics of the systematic review process. This short course draws on expertise from successfully conducting over 50 funded reviews for a variety of purposes and with a range of published outputs. The Course Team has developed tools for planning and costing systematic reviews for research and consultancy and has produced guidelines for managing the review process which will form the basis of this very practical and interactive workshop. 

Who will benefit from the course?

This workshop, based on previous successful short courses by the same team, will meet the needs of those wishing to plan, cost and manage their first independent review of the literature. It will also be beneficial for more experienced reviewers who wish to gain experience of a variety of tips and tools to manage the review process. No previous familiarity of conducting systematic reviews is required although participants will be expected to have a good awareness of what a systematic review is and what it involves.      

·         Experienced researchers wishing an insight into specific project management challenges associated with systematic reviews

·         Systematic Reviewers who wish to advance to managing their own review

·         PhD Students in topic areas who are undertaking a substantive review of the literature

·         Research administrators who want an overview of the systematic review process and its implications for finance and administration

Course Faculty

Andrew Booth, Reader in Evidence Based Information Practice, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR)
Lead author and contributor to Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review (Sage, 2011)          

Expected Outcomes

By the end of this programme participants will be able to:

·         Characterise the main systematic approaches to reviewing the literature and their implications in terms of time, personnel and money

·         Identify major decision points along the pathway of the systematic review process

·         Describe a variety of useful tools and techniques designed to facilitate the planning and conduct of a systematic review

·         Identify common review problem scenarios and strategies to resolve them successfully 

Accommodation and Meals

Lunch and light refreshments will be provided

Accommodation is not included in the cost of the course, please contact us scharr-scu@sheffield.ac.uk for information on local hotels.

Course Dates

Friday 12th April 2013

Venue

The Ridge Conference Centre, Sheffield

Fees

£200 per person

Bookings

Click HERE to book online

Contact Us

email : ScHARR Short Course UnitScHARR Short Course Unit

Tel: +44 222 2968
Fax: +44 222 4095

Future Courses

We will be offering new courses in the future as well as repeating selected subjects which have generated high demand.
Join Our Mailing List

New Evidence Alerts available

There are three new Evidence Alerts for you to subscribe to.

They are:

• Fall Prevention Horizon Scanning
• Patient Safety Horizon Scanning
• Orthopaedics Horizon Scanning

Please visit the Library webpage to subscribe to these bulletins.