Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Dexamethasone as Adjuvants to Ultra-Sound Guided Interscalene Block in Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Double-Blinded Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study.

Background: Interscalene block is one of the popular methods for decreasing pain and analgesic consumption after shoulder arthroscopic surgeries.

Objectives: The objective is to compare the analgesic duration of effects of dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as adjuvants to 0.5% ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided interscalene blocks for arthroscopic shoulder surgery in an ambulatory setting.

Evaluation of the safety of arteriovenous fistula creation surgery in ambulatory versus inpatient hospital setting.

Arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation surgeries necessary for dialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease have traditionally been performed in inpatient settings under general anesthesia. Although more recent studies have demonstrated that these surgeries can be safely performed in outpatient centers with low postoperative complication rates, a direct comparison to surgeries performed in inpatient settings has not been investigated. This study sought to directly compare the rate of complications and postoperative mortality in AVF creation surgeries performed in outpatient and inpatient surgical centers.

Keeping psychologists in the driver's seat: Four perspectives on quality improvement and clinical data registries.

Performance accountability-also frequently referred to as quality improvement in the fields of medicine and public policy-is under growing scrutiny in mental and behavioral health care. As one high-profile example, psychologists and other mental health providers will be deemed "eligible clinicians" under the 2015 Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act starting in 2019. This will incentivize psychologists to track their Medicare patients' clinical outcomes and report them in data registries, and those who do not will suffer a reimbursement penalty.

Penalized or Protected? Gender and the Consequences of Nonstandard and Mismatched Employment Histories.

Millions of workers are employed in positions that deviate from the full-time, standard employment relationship or work in jobs that are mismatched with their skills, education, or experience. Yet, little is known about how employers evaluate workers who have experienced these employment arrangements, limiting our knowledge about how part-time work, temporary agency employment, and skills underutilization affect workers' labor market opportunities. Drawing on original field and survey experiment data, I examine three questions: (1) What are the consequences of having a nonstandard or mismatched employment history for workers' labor market opportunities? (2) Are the effects of nonstandard or mismatched employment histories different for men and women? and (3) What are the mechanisms linking nonstandard or mismatched employment histories to labor market outcomes? The field experiment shows that skills underutilization is as scarring for workers as a year of unemployment, but that there are limited penalties for workers with histories of temporary agency employment.