Paid sick leave may reduce work injuries NEW YORK: A new study suggests that offering paid sick leave might reduce the rate of non-fatal injury among workers and improve the bottom line at the same time. Using data on about 38,000 workers from a national survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,researchers found that from 2005 to 2008 the injury rate per 100 workers among those with paid sick leave was 2.59,compared with 4.18 among those without. The availability of sick leave and the probability of injury varies by industry,sex,education level and geography. But even after accounting for these and other variables,researchers found that odds of a non-fatal injury were 28 per cent lower among workers with paid sick leave. The authors,writing online in The American Journal of Public Health,acknowledge that the data does not establish a causal relationship between paid leave and fewer injuries. Prenatal gene test detects disease: Trial NEW YORK: A new method of prenatal testing that can detect more genetic problems in a foetus than ever before could be headed toward wider use after encouraging results from a clinical trial,researchers said. Dr Ronald Wapner was the lead investigator in the clinical trial. The study found that the new technique,microarray,surpassed standard testing in detecting chromosomal abnormalities that can cause problems like autism or mental retardation. The last 8 to 12 months have probably seen the greatest change weve had in prenatal screening and diagnostics since the development of amniocentesis, said Dr Lee Shulman,head of reproductive genetics at Northwestern Universitys Feinberg School of Medicine. The new technique still requires fetal cells to be obtained either by amniocentesis,in which a long needle is stuck into the womb. But instead of examining foetal chromosomes under a microscope,a DNA-sensing chip is used to detect abnormalities. Robot prostatectomy cuts incontinence NEW YORK: Robot surgery for prostate cancer lowered the rate of urinary complications compared with hands-on surgery in a new Italian study. While the study was small and contradicts earlier results,its important because robot surgery has quickly overtaken cheaper alternatives in the US,helped by hospitals aggressively marketing the technology. Yet there is no ironclad science showing its any better,and many doctors have voiced concerns about the higher costs. In the Italian study,one surgeon operated on 120 men,each of whom had been randomly assigned to a minimally invasive surgery called laparoscopy with or without the help of a robot. During the robot procedure,a surgeon sits at a video console and manipulates two or three arms,one tipped with a tiny camera,that reach into the patient through small cuts in the belly. There,the doctor cuts out the cancer-ridden prostate gland using the robot arms. The hand-on version is done the same way,but without the robot middleman. Researchers found no reliable difference in blood loss,operating time,length of hospital stay or cancer outcomes at one year.
