Master of Science, The Ohio State University, 2023, Vision Science

The purpose of this study was to survey sports vision practitioners to gather information on sports vision practice. The goal was to learn where opportunities are being found within sports vision and the details of practitioners' preferred practice patterns. Sixty-one sports vision practitioners answered questions on an online survey after providing informed consent. For those who answered the question regarding their profession, 87% were optometrists. The survey included multiple choice questions, along with a table of sports vision related tools. For the multiple choice questions, survey takers were asked questions about practitioner and athletic population demographics, sports vision assessment and training, and optical tints and nutraceuticals. Survey respondents indicated how often they employed each of the tools in the table. The number of responses for the multiple choice questions ranged from 42 to 61 and the number of responses per device in the matrix table range from 47 to 50. Devices in the matrix table were categorized three ways. Firstly, as analog and digital devices. Secondly, as devices that train the visual hardware versus visual software systems. Lastly, the devices were organized in a 4-tier system based on previously proposed hierarchical visual perceptual models. The survey results indicate that sports vision practitioners have found a wide range of opportunities to work with athletes across several sports and age groups as indicated by responses to questions about athletic patient population, characteristics of work with athletes, and about contracts with sports teams. The sports with athletes with whom the survey responders work (most commonly baseball, 71.15%) generally aligns with the published sports vision research, where baseball is the most studied population. There are discrepancies among the level of sport represented by the results of this survey (most commonly high schoolers, 75.4%) and the literature, where collegiate a (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Nicklaus Fogt (Advisor); Alexandar Andrich (Committee Member); Nicky Lai (Committee Member); Aaron Zimmerman (Committee Member) Subjects: Ophthalmology; Sports Medicine

Master of Science, The Ohio State University, 2021, Dentistry

Background: Sound decisions regarding appropriate treatments are dependent on health information for the entire population. Previous studies have shown wide variations in medical and dental treatments regarding health care use over well-defined geographic areas. More specifically, trends in periodontal therapy may vary between states irrespective of the disease prevalence. This study will explore potential differences in private insurance claims data to determine if variations exist between periodontal practices in Michigan and Ohio from 2010 to 2020. Methods: Current dental terminology (CDT) codes for diagnostic, preventive, periodontal, oral and maxillofacial surgery and adjunctive general services were compared between Michigan and Ohio periodontists. The retrospective data collected for claims included the number of procedures performed per year for each state, the total of procedures per year for each state divided by the number of providers, and the grand total of claims from all years. The total number of procedures per provider, per year, with the mean ± the standard error of the mean was also included Results: A significant difference was found between Michigan and Ohio in many dental procedures. Michigan claimed more CDT diagnostic (552,419 vs 178,356), preventive (55,085 vs 15,083), periodontal (1,103,884 vs 348,242), implant (58,083 vs 35,070), oral and maxillofacial surgical (126,483 vs 85,078) and adjunctive general (30,994 vs 18,334), codes than Ohio. Conclusions: There was significant variation in dental treatments between Michigan and Ohio, suggesting dental care guidelines vary between the states.

Committee: Angelo Mariotti (Advisor); Jeffery Johnston (Committee Member); Eric Seiber (Committee Member) Subjects: Dental Care; Dentistry

Master of Science, The Ohio State University, 2020, Genetic Counseling

Background: Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder and constitutes the most common type of dementia. The genetics of AD includes autosomal dominant highly penetrant variants leading to early onset AD, risk alleles which contribute to risk for late onset AD, and other multifactorial inheritance risk factors. In 2011, the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) and the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) published Joint Practice Guidelines for Genetic Counseling and Testing for Alzheimer Disease which establish a framework for genetic counseling and testing for a personal or family history of AD. Given the prevalence of Alzheimer's disease in the general population, genetic counselors are likely to encounter family histories of AD outside of neurology practice. Yet, there is little information known about how counselors in non-neurology settings, (e.g. cancer, prenatal, or pediatric sub-specialties) are actually addressing AD when it presents in their clinical practice. The aim of this study was to address this gap in the literature by ascertaining practice patterns related to AD among non-neurology genetic counselors. Methods: American Board of Genetic Counseling (ABGC)-board certified genetic counselors who provided genetic counseling services within the last year in non-neurology clinical practice were recruited to participant in an anonymous Qualtrics© survey. This survey consisted of 32 multiple-choice questions, which ascertained demographic information, AD practice patterns, and survey participants responses to five pedigrees depicting hypothetical AD family history scenarios. The five pedigree scenarios included a family history of early-onset AD (EOAD) with no known AD-associated pathogenic variant, familial late-onset AD (LOAD), sporadic AD, family history of a known APOE e4 allele homozygote, and a known PSEN1 gene pathogenic variant. Descriptive statistics was utilized for statistical analysis. Results: Seventy-thre (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Dawn Allain MS, CGC (Advisor); Rawan Tarawneh MD (Committee Member); Alexandra Ilacqua MS, CGC (Committee Member) Subjects: Genetics

DNP, Walsh University, 2015, Nursing

The complexity of the health care system poses challenges to patients and staff alike. Advanced technologies and processes are designed to keep patients safe but the human aspects of care are variables to consider. Those variables can include delays in recognizing patient decompensation, miscommunication between caregivers, or failures to act. Adjuncts to care that can predict patient decompensation, clinical outcomes, and severity of illness are known as early warning scoring systems. In an effort to standardize these systems, the Royal College of Physicians established the National Early Warning Score in 2012. The purpose of this study was to establish inter rater reliability of the National Early Warning Score by comparing Registered Nurses and Patient Care Assistants practicing in a long term acute care hospital.

Committee: Karen Gehrling PhD (Committee Chair); Judy Kreye PhD (Committee Member); Barbara Moran MBA, BSN (Committee Member) Subjects: Nursing