№ lp_1_2_36722
File format: docx
Character count: 2989
File size: 54 KB
This document provides risk management recommendations for ophthalmologists on the procedures and steps for conducting a "time out" before intravitreal injections to minimize errors.
Year:
2016
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Ophthalmology, Risk Management
Document Type:
Risk Management Recommendations
Organization / Institution:
OMIC
Author:
Anne M. Menke, Pauline Merrill, Trexler M. Topping, George Williams
Target Audience:
Ophthalmologists, Healthcare Providers
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
8/26/16
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Year:
2020
Region / City:
Australia
Topic:
Medical Treatment, Pharmaceutical
Document Type:
Submission
Organ / Institution:
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia Pty Limited
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Healthcare professionals, policymakers
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2024-2025
Region / city:
Moshi, Tanzania
Subject:
Diabetic Macular Edema, Intravitreal Bevacizumab
Document Type:
Research Article
Organization / Institution:
Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre (KCMC)
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Healthcare professionals, researchers in ophthalmology
Period of Application:
June 2024 - July 2025
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2020
Region / city:
Australia
Topic:
Biosimilar medicine submission
Document type:
Pharmaceutical submission
Organization / institution:
Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC)
Author:
Maxx Pharma Pty Ltd
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, regulatory bodies
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Approval date:
November 2022
Modification date:
November 2022
Note:
Year
Topic:
Lipid disorders, Cardiovascular Risk
Document Type:
Medical guideline
Target Audience:
Medical professionals, healthcare providers
Year:
2023
Region / city:
UK
Topic:
Medical procedures, Informed consent, Physiotherapy
Document type:
Guidelines
Author:
Chartered Society of Physiotherapists
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, Physiotherapists
Date of approval:
2023
Date of changes:
N/A
Year:
2022
Region / City:
ACT and surrounding NSW
Topic:
Paediatric Diabetes Care, Insulin Pump Therapy
Document Type:
Clinical Guideline
Organization:
Canberra Health Services (CHS)
Author:
Canberra Health Services, Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes Service
Target Audience:
Paediatric Diabetes Healthcare Providers
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Last Revision:
N/A
Version number:
6.0
Approved by:
Medicines Committee
Ratified by:
Medicines Committee
Date ratified:
June 2023
Original author:
Luton & Bedfordshire Lead Pharmacist
Executive Director lead:
Chief Medical Officer
Implementation Date:
July 2023
Last Review Date:
June 2023
Next Review Date:
June 2026
Services:
Trustwide, Mental Health and LD, Community Health Services
Type of document:
Policy
Scope:
Long-acting antipsychotic injections, typical and atypical
Target audience:
Clinicians, pharmacists, mental health services staff
Document structure:
Includes guidance on initiation, choice, and monitoring of depot injections, adverse effect reporting, and appendices with forms and rating scales
Year:
2019
Region / City:
New Delhi, India
Sector:
Energy
Document Type:
Request for Qualification
Organization:
REC Transmission Projects Company Ltd.
Author:
REC Transmission Projects Company Ltd.
Target Audience:
Potential Bidders for Transmission Service Provider
Period of Validity:
Until 08.02.2019
Approval Date:
12th January 2019
Amendments Date:
Not provided
Organisation:
Hope Vets
Address:
Shantock Hall Lane, Bovingdon, HP3 0NQ
Telephone:
01442 833198
Email:
[email protected]
Website:
www.hopevets.com
Document type:
Instructional handout
Subject:
Administration of subcutaneous injections in pets
Medications mentioned:
Cytopoint, Librela, Solensia, Zycortal, insulin
Intended audience:
Pet owners administering injections at home
Related resources:
YouTube videos; Caninsulin website
Sharps disposal guidance:
Return to veterinary practice; use of sharps container or sealed container
Year:
2025
Region / City:
England
Subject:
Healthcare / NHS
Document Type:
Official communication
Organization / Institution:
NHS England
Author:
Erika Sutcliffe
Target Audience:
Healthcare professionals involved in NHS primary care
Effective Period:
From 1st May 2025
Approval Date:
28th May 2025
Date of Changes:
28th May 2025
Year:
2015
Region / Institution:
United Kingdom, Royal College of Radiologists
Subject:
Patient safety and documentation in intra-articular injections
Document type:
Audit report
Authors:
Dr Andrew Koo, Dr Daniel Fascia; Updated by P Mehrotra (2018), D Remedios (2022)
Target audience:
Radiologists, clinical staff performing joint injections
Review date:
23 July 2022
Publication date:
24 June 2015
Indicators:
Documentation of type, volume, and concentration of local anaesthetic agents
Methodology:
Collection of patient data from RIS, adherence to WHO and RCR safety guidelines
Recommendations:
Use of WHO checklist, departmental guidelines, and report macros for documentation
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Louisiana, Baton Rouge
Subject:
Procurement of Hydroxocobalamin Injections
Document Type:
Invitation to Bid / Procurement Terms
Agency:
Louisiana Department of Health, Office of State Procurement
RFx Number:
3000025811
Bid Submission Deadline:
03/04/2026 @ 10:00 A.M. (Central Time)
Inquiry Deadline:
02/18/2026
Response to Inquiries Deadline:
02/25/2026
Delivery Instructions:
Physical or online submission to Office of State Procurement
Payment Terms:
Unit price compensation, full delivery not required for partial payment
Authorized Contact:
Alex Jackson
Website for Registration:
https://lagoverpvendor.doa.louisiana.gov/irj/portal/anonymous?guest_user=self_reg
Online Bid Portal:
LaPAC
Year:
2022
Region / city:
N/A
Subject:
Platelet rich plasma (PRP) therapy
Document type:
Clinical guideline
Institution:
HERC
Author:
N/A
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, researchers
Period of validity:
N/A
Approval date:
March 2022
Date of amendments:
N/A
Year:
2026
Databases:
PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Sinomed
Topic:
Shoulder impingement syndrome
Intervention:
Corticosteroid injection under ultrasound guidance
Study design:
Randomized controlled trials
Number of records identified:
48–86 per database
Search terms:
Disease, Study design, Corticosteroids, Intervention
Language:
English
Document type:
Supplementary material
Note:
Year
Document Type:
KB Article
Year:
2025
Region / City:
New York City
Theme:
City Planning
Document Type:
Public Notice
Organ / Institution:
City Planning Commission
Author:
City Planning Commission
Target Audience:
Public, Stakeholders
Period of Action:
October 8, 2025
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Amendments:
N/A
Year:
Not specified
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Software Licensing Agreement
Document Type:
Legal Agreement
Organization / Institution:
Schrödinger, L.L.C.
Author:
Schrödinger, L.L.C.
Target Audience:
Licensee, Users
Effective Period:
3 years
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
License Type:
Not specified
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters