Using The Method Of S2

Today, prostate cancer is usually detected through screening, and there are two methods for early detection. The prostate-specific antigen test (PSA) is used, but there are

In the case for PSA screening, PCa is the leading internal malignancy in US men and the second leading cause of cancer death in American men. Early detection of prostate cancers offers the best chance of cure. The PSA blood test is the best chance of cure. Currently, the PSA blood test is the best currently available way to detect PCa and it is easy, safe and inexpensive. PSA test results is a piece of information, it is what doctors do with the information that becomes the issue. However, the great majority of PSA detected tumors have the histologic characteristics of clinically important cancers. Also, PSA detection has found tumors early advancing the diagnosis by Seeral years (5-13) and prostate cancer mortality rates in U.S have decreased by 4% (patho book) since 1992, which is 5 years after initiation of prostate screenings. The dilemma is over treating the clinically unimportant disease versus under

Another method to detect this cancer is with a Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA). Protein in the blood that is produced only by prostate cells is reflected the volume of both benign and malignant prostate tissue in the PSA. The higher the PSA level is the more likely it is that Prostate Cancer present. (“Prostate

Organizations are not the only ones at odds with current screening methods. Depending on which organization a physician prefers to follow, a patient may be told to have PSA screening by one physician and be advised to avoid PSA screening by another physician. There are several different factors why this screening is controversial. The most important is the sensitivity and specificity of PSA screening. Research has shown that PSA screening presents with an unusually high amount of false positive results (U.S. Preventative Services Task Force, 2012). This raises some concerns whether the benefit of screening outweighs the possibility of over

Prostate cancer is a kind of cancer that affects the prostate gland in men. It is a common cancer that grows slowly and its treatment can be done successfully if it is detected at an early stage. Sometimes, symptoms are not visible in case of cancer limited to the prostate gland which may result into metastatic cancer. To detect the symptoms, active surveillance can be done. There are various options available

There is no definitive cause of PCa but age, race and family history are important risk factors.

Various inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied throughout the studies. Studies such as Holmedahl et al. (2014) and Venkateswaran et al. (2014) intentionally excluded patients with only OSA. Wang et al. (2015) and

Benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer share a few similarities, elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Along with enlargement of prostate gland that causes urinary symptoms such as, frequent urination, hesitancy, dribbling, and frequent nighttime urination. However, they are quite different which is why more tests need to be done to confirm one or the other condition. These two diseases are also similar in the fact that they both cause an enlargement of the prostate. However with BPH the central portion of the prostate is enlarged and with prostate cancer more commonly the lateral lobes or side of the prostate are enlarged, but can affect any were on the prostate. Both can even be detected by a digital rectal exam however

Case Study in Polypharmacy Option #1 Lauren Finnigan Curry College NSG 2500   Abstract This paper will explore the role of a home care nurse, caring for Mr. Smith, a 78-year-old man living alone in his own home in Quincy, MA. Mr. Smith is diagnosed with CAD, S/p MI- PTCA 2 stents, Hypertension, Heart Failure, Atrial Fibrillation, Osteoarthritis, Osteoporosis, and BPH. Due to Mr. Smiths multiple diagnoses he is a patient with polypharmacy, meaning he as a patient uses four or more medications. Polypharmacy will be discussed in this paper and the effects of the multiple medication usages among patients.

The collection of data involved three fingersticks in the morning and in the afternoon by PCA, nurse and investigator Data described the dependent and independent variables involving the time lapse between PCA’s testing and nurse testing (prior to administering insulin); insulin dose that would be given with the PCA’s BG result and the insulin dose that would be given with the nurse BG result (nurses BG were lower at the time of SSI dose) .

Risk factors of the condition include malignant disease, type I diabetes mellitus, arthritis, osteoporosis, down syndrome, dermatitis herpetiformis, few respond to steroids and increased mortality because of the high risk of malignancy (Liu et al.,

The goal population for this study includes adults over the age of 18, who do not have any comorbidity. Though the JNC guidelines are meant to aid in the diagnosis and treatment of healthy adults and those with chronic illness, this review will focus on adults without any chronic illnesses. This will allow for a much more concise report on how guidelines have changed within this target population alone. It will also put into perspective, how the major diagnosing criterion has changed in the last twenty years for those without any other chronic illnesses.

This is a population based retrospective study. It examined the incidence of hospitalization among men who underwent TRUS guided prostates biopsy between January 1, 1996 and December 31, 2005 in Ontario Canada. No independent or dependent variables were identified. TRUS guided biopsies were carried out by relatively small number (437) of specialist physicians (urologists) (Nam et al., 2012). The researchers used Ontario Health Insurance Plan codes, Canadian

follow-up studies provide the scientific infrastructure for diagnosis and classification. Family studies indicate elevated risk of the index

According to the PCD Foundation, there are about 400,000 people worldwide with PCD and an estimated 25,000 in the United States. The PCD foundation states that very few patients have been identified due to the fact of the difficulty in diagnosing the disorder. Knowles et al. indicated that “the prevalence of PCD in the United States is difficult to determine largely due to inadequacies of diagnostic measures. There are fewer than 1,000 patients in the United States with a well established diagnosis of PCD”. In relation to race, ethnicity, heritage or gender there is no identifiable at risk group (PCD Foundation).