RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The use of jargon has become very common in the healthcare field, especially in medical/dental records. Although the use of standard medical jargon can be seen as professional, efficient shorthand, a lack of awareness regarding the standard medical abbreviations and incessant and overzealous use of slang among the healthcare professionals can act as a barrier to effective communication and understanding among patients and peers. The aim of this study was to assess the acceptance and use of jargon in case history taking among clinical dental students and dental teaching faculty members of dental colleges in Ernakulam and Idukki districts of Kerala. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey was carried out, consisting of 15 questions, to assess the objectives of the study. The study was conducted among clinical dental undergraduate students, house surgeons, postgraduate students and teaching faculty members of five dental colleges in Ernakulam and Idukki districts, Kerala. The results were expressed as a number and percentage of response for each question and Chi-squared test was used for inferential statistical analysis. RESULTS: All the 549 respondents used jargon in case history taking. Approximately 22.4% of the respondents admitted that they always used jargon and 55.8% admitted of using jargon only when there was a lack of time. The majority of the respondents (71.4%) learned the jargon from their colleagues. Approximately 50% of the respondents admitted use of jargon in a history section and about 32% of the respondents in all the sections of case history taking. Approximately 74% were of the opinion that abbreviations should be permitted in case history taking. CONCLUSION: This study showed widespread use of jargon/abbreviations in case history taking among the respondents. There is a lack of knowledge regarding standard medical abbreviations. Although the majority of the respondents were comfortable with the use of jargon, the majority of the postgraduates and faculty members felt the use of jargon should be stopped.
RESUMO
We describe a method to estimate the scale errors in the horizontal angle encoder of a laser tracker in this paper. The method does not require expensive instrumentation such as a rotary stage or even a calibrated artifact. An uncalibrated but stable length is realized between two targets mounted on stands that are at tracker height. The tracker measures the distance between these two targets from different azimuthal positions (say, in intervals of 20° over 360°). Each target is measured in both front face and back face. Low order harmonic scale errors can be estimated from this data and may then be used to correct the encoder's error map to improve the tracker's angle measurement accuracy. We have demonstrated this for the second order harmonic in this paper. It is important to compensate for even order harmonics as their influence cannot be removed by averaging front face and back face measurements whereas odd orders can be removed by averaging. We tested six trackers from three different manufacturers. Two of those trackers are newer models introduced at the time of writing of this paper. For older trackers from two manufacturers, the length errors in a 7.75 m horizontal length placed 7 m away from a tracker were of the order of ± 65 µm before correcting the error map. They reduced to less than ± 25 µm after correcting the error map for second order scale errors. Newer trackers from the same manufacturers did not show this error. An older tracker from a third manufacturer also did not show this error.
RESUMO
Small and unintended offsets, tilts, and eccentricity of the mechanical and optical components in laser trackers introduce systematic errors in the measured spherical coordinates (angles and range readings) and possibly in the calculated lengths of reference artifacts. It is desirable that the tests described in the ASME B89.4.19 Standard [1] be sensitive to these geometric misalignments so that any resulting systematic errors are identified during performance evaluation. In this paper, we present some analysis, using error models and numerical simulation, of the sensitivity of the length measurement system tests and two-face system tests in the B89.4.19 Standard to misalignments in laser trackers. We highlight key attributes of the testing strategy adopted in the Standard and propose new length measurement system tests that demonstrate improved sensitivity to some misalignments. Experimental results with a tracker that is not properly error corrected for the effects of the misalignments validate claims regarding the proposed new length tests.
