Publish in OALib Journal
APC: Only $99
The Disengagement Plan is the name assigned to the plan enacted in the summer of 2005 to evict all Israelis and military bases from Gaza Strip and four isolated settlements in northern Samaria and to withdraw unilaterally. The plan was controversial, yet it won the support of the majority of the cabinet and the Knesset members, as well as the support in Israel and the world. The eviction process of the residents was accompanied by vast activities of the army and police forces in fear of violent acts by the evacuees, and by extensive media coverage. It was one of the longest and most covered events in the history of Israel and intensified the conflict between security needs and free press. In democracies such as Israel, which faces security needs on permanent basis, the media are expected to carry social responsibility duties of not publishing information that is sensitive to national security. It is commonly agreed that although Israel is a democratic state where freedom of speech and freedom of the press are cornerstones of its existence, in all that relates to security things should be different, and security issues are above the need of the media to publish and the need of the public to know. The position of the press in the disengagement and the way they dealt with this dilemma are analyzed in this study based on covering reports in the main Israeli daily newspaper—Yediot Achronot—during the period from January 1, 2005 through August 24, 2005, when the evacuation of all Israelis from Gaza Strip was completed.
With a portion of healthcare
reimbursement now dependent on the patient’s report of the hospital experience,
healthcare systems are looking for ways to improve patient satisfaction scores.
In this study, one inpatient physiatrist at an acute inpatient rehabilitation
facility wore a button on the right lapel of his white coat at all times which
read, “Ask ME about your TREATMENT and PROGRESS!!!” in order to determine if a
wearable visual cue prompting the patient to discuss his or her treatment and
progress alters Press Ganey Patient Satisfaction Survey (PGPSS) scores. Mean
score on the physician-specific PGPSS question “How well the rehabilitation
doctor kept you informed about your treatment and progress” was calculated
retrospectively for five months before and after the physiatrist donned the
button. Comparisons were made to two other inpatient physiatrists. For the button-wearing physiatrist, mean score for the physician-specific patient
satisfaction survey question for the five months before donning the button was
88.1 ± 11.5; and, for the five months after donning the button, the mean score
was 95.8 ± 5.9. These scores were marginally statistically different (p = 0.07). Conversely, the difference
in mean scores over the same time periods for two other inpatient
physiatrists who did not wear the button did not approach statistical significance.
In conclusion, a wearable visual cue improved the PGPSS score specific to the
question the visual cue addressed.