• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Wed, 17.07.24

Search results


October 2017
Alon Z. Sapir MD, Izzat Khayyat MD, Ron Rabinowitz MD, Arnon Samueloff MD, Lior Drukker MD and Hen Y. Sela MD

Background: Two types of growth curves are commonly used to diagnose fetal growth disorders: neonatal birth weight (BW) and sonographic estimated fetal weight (EFW). The debate as to which growth curve to use is universal.

Objectives: To establish sonographic EFW growth curves for the Israeli population and to assess whether the use of the BW growth curves currently adapted in Israel leads to under-diagnosis of intrauterine growth disorders.

Methods: Biometric data collected during a 6 year period was analyzed to establish sonographic EFW growth curves between 15–42 weeks of gestation for the Israeli population. Growth curves were compared to previously published sonographic EFW growth curves. A comparison with the Israeli BW growth curves was performed to assess the possibility of under-diagnosis of intrauterine growth disorders.

Results: Out of 42,778 sonographic EFW studies, 31,559 met the inclusion criteria. The sonographic EFW growth curves from the current study resembled the EFW curves previously published. The comparison of the current sonographic EFW and BW growth curves revealed under-diagnosis of intrauterine growth disorders during the preterm period. Four percent of the fetuses assessed between 26–34 weeks would have been suspected of being growth restricted; 2.8 percent of the fetuses assessed between 30–36 weeks would have been suspected of having macrosomia, based on the BW growth curves.

Conclusions: New Israeli sonographic EFW growth curves resemble previously published sonographic EFW curves. Using BW growth curves may lead to the under-diagnosis of growth disorders. We recommend adopting sonographic EFW growth to diagnose intrauterine growth disorders.

January 2009
H. Gilutz, L. Novack, P. Shvartzman, J. Zelingher, D.Y. Bonneh, Y. Henkin, M. Maislos, R. Peleg, Z. Liss, G. Rabinowitz, D. Vardy, D. Zahger, R. Ilia, N. Leibermann and A. Porath

Background: Dyslipidemia remains underdiagnosed and undertreated in patients with coronary artery disease. The Computer-based Clinical Decision Support System provides an opportunity to close these gaps.

Objectives: To study the impact of computerized intervention on secondary prevention of CAD[1].

Methods: The CDSS[2] was programmed to automatically detect patients with CAD and to evaluate the availability of an updated lipoprotein profile and treatment with lipid-lowering drugs. The program produced automatic computer-generated monitoring and treatment recommendations. Adjusted primary clinics were randomly assigned to intervention (n=56) or standard care arms (n=56). Reminders were mailed to the primary medical teams in the intervention arm every 4 months updating them with current lipid levels and recommendations for further treatment. Compliance and lipid levels were monitored. The study group comprised all patients with CAD who were alive at least 3 months after hospitalization.

Results: Follow-up was available for 7448 patients with CAD (median 19.8 months, range 6–36 months). Overall, 51.7% of patients were adequately screened, and 55.7% of patients were compliant with treatment recommended to lower lipid level. A significant decrease in low density lipoprotein levels was observed in both arms, but was more pronounced in the intervention arm: 121.9 ± 34.2 vs. 124.3 ± 34.6 mg/dl (P < 0.02). A significantly lower rate of cardiac rehospitalizations was documented in patients who were adequately treated with lipid-lowering drugs, 37% vs. 40.9% (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: This initial assessment of our data represent a real-world snapshot where physicians and CAD patients often do not adhere to clinical guidelines, presenting a major obstacle to implementing effective secondary prevention. Our automatic computerized reminders system substantially facilitates adherence to guidelines and supports wide-range implementation.






[1] CAD = coronary artery disease



[2] CDSS = clinical decision support system


March 2004
April 2003
S. Behar, A. Battler, A. Porath, J. Leor, E. Grossman, Y. Hasin, M. Mittelman, Z. Feigenberg, C. Rahima-Maoz, M. Green, A. Caspi, B. Rabinowitz and M. Garty

Background: Little information is available on the clinical practice and implementation of guidelines in treating acute myocardial infarction patients in Israel.

Objective: To assess patient characteristics, hospital course, management, and 30 day clinical outcome of all AMI[1] patients hospitalized in Israel during a 2 month period in 2000.

Method: We conducted a prospective 2 month survey of consecutive AMI patients admitted to 82 of 96 internal medicine departments and all 26 cardiac departments operating in Israel in 2000. Data were collected uniformly by means of a hospital and 30 day follow-up form.

Results: During the survey 1,683 consecutive patients with a discharge diagnosis of AMI were included. Their mean age was 66 years; 73% were male. The electrocardiographic pattern on admission revealed ST elevation, non-ST elevation and an undetermined ECG[2] in 63%, 34% and 4% of patients respectively. Aspirin and heparin were given to 95% of patients. Beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were given to 76% and 65% of patients respectively. Among hospital survivors, 45% received lipid-lowering drugs. Thrombolytic therapy was administered in 28% of patients, coronary angiography was used in 45%, and 7% of patients underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The 7 and 30 day mortality rates were 7% and 11% respectively.

Conclusions: This nationwide survey shows that one-third of the AMI patients in Israel are elderly (≥ 75 years). The survey suggests that clinical guidelines for the management of patients with AMI are partially implemented in the community. Data from large surveys representing the "real world" practice are of utmost importance for the evaluation of clinical guidelines, research and educational purposes.






[1] AMI = acute myocardial infarction



[2] ECG = electrocardiogram


Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel