Annual performance appraisal: one organization's process and retrospective analysis of outcomes.

Performance assessment of personnel is an important component of an organization's quality management program, benefiting the organization, individuals and clients. Performance appraisal is the most common method. This article describes the three-part performance appraisal tool used at the authors' organization, a private inter-professional healthcare agency providing rehabilitation services to clients in the community, and presents the results of a retrospective analysis of the outcomes. Performance appraisals of 13 personnel were randomly selected, representing 39 chart audits and 25 joint client visits. The achievement of mandatory chart audit standards demonstrated 95 ± 7.2% compliance; expected standards showed 96 ± 3.3% compliance. Qualitative findings from the joint visits and interviews showed that therapists enjoyed the process and experience, valued the feedback and appreciated the support they received. Benefits and challenges of the process were identified, resulting in new initiatives being implemented. The authors confirmed that the tool achieves its intended purpose and is relevant in the home care setting.

Darbepoetin alfa effectively maintains haemoglobin concentrations at extended dose intervals relative to intravenous or subcutaneous recombinant human erythropoietin in dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Darbepoetin alfa is a unique molecule that stimulates erythropoiesis by the same mechanism as endogenous erythropoietin. Due to its approximately 3-fold longer half-life and greater biological activity than recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEpo), darbepoetin alfa maintains effective haemoglobin control at extended dose intervals compared with rHuEpo. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of unit doses of darbepoetin alfa for the treatment of renal anaemia. METHODS: In this multicentre, prospective, open-label study, 1502 dialysis subjects maintained on stable rHuEpo treatment were switched to darbepoetin alfa at extended dose intervals by the same route of administration as previous rHuEpo therapy [intravenous (i.v.), n = 900 or subcutaneous (s.c.), n = 602]. Subjects receiving rHuEpo two (n = 408, 27%) or three times (n = 884, 59%) a week were switched to darbepoetin alfa once a week, and those receiving rHuEpo once a week (n = 210, 14%) were switched to darbepoetin alfa once every 2 weeks. The unit doses of darbepoetin alfa (10-150 microg) were titrated to maintain haemoglobin concentrations of 10-13 g/dl for 24 weeks. RESULTS: Haemoglobin concentrations were maintained effectively in subjects regardless of whether they received darbepoetin alfa once a week or once every 2 weeks. The overall mean change in haemoglobin from baseline to the evaluation period (weeks 21-24) was +0.10 g/dl [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04+/- 0.17]. The mean haemoglobin concentration increased by 0.19 g/dl (95% CI 0.11+/-0.27) in subjects receiving i.v. darbepoetin alfa, and was unchanged (-0.02 g/dl; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.07) in patients treated with s.c. darbepoetin alfa. Subjects with baseline haemoglobin < 11 g/dl experienced a clinically relevant increase in mean haemoglobin concentration of 0.67 g/dl (95% CI 0.56+/-0.77) from baseline to the evaluation period. The mean weekly i.v. and s.c. darbepoetin alfa dosage requirements during the evaluation period were 19.9 microg/week (95% CI 19.02+/-20.87) and 21.6 microg/week (95% CI 20.36+/- 22.94), respectively. Darbepoetin alfa was well tolerated and the safety profile was consistent with previous trials with darbepoetin alfa in dialysis subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Treating renal anaemia with darbepoetin alfa administered at extended dose intervals is both effective and well tolerated. Moreover, administration of darbepoetin alfa by both the i.v. and s.c. route is associated with stable haemoglobin concentrations.

Cross-cultural comparison of the Mini-Mental State examination in United Kingdom and United States participants with Alzheimer's disease.

OBJECTIVES: the relative difficulties of items on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) were compared in English-speaking Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients in the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: participants were aged 75 and over, with a clinical diagnosis of AD according to standardized methods. Initial MMSE scores from an AD patient registry in the US (n = 401), and a field survey in the UK (n = 139) were compared. Item Characteristic Curve analysis (ICC) was used to calculate the relative difficulty of individual MMSE items, adjusted for the remaining MMSE items. Age, gender, education, and severity of disease were evaluated as possible confounders. RESULTS: UK participants found it relatively more difficult to name their county than US participants did to name their state. The relative difficulties of registration and recall, repeating a phrase, and following verbal directions also were significantly higher for the UK participants, even after adjustment for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: differences between the cohorts could be explained by translation artifacts in the test items or by cultural differences in the manifestation of AD. In this study, most, if not all differences can be explained by the former. ICC analysis can be used to develop tests that are functionally equivalent, a prerequisite for comparing dementia in different populations.