Unchanged Status Research Articles

Penetrating Keratoplasty and Transscleral Fixation of Posterior Chamber Lens

We reviewed the outcome in 115 patients who underwent penetrating keratoplasty and transscleral fixation of a posterior chamber lens. One patient died soon after surgical procedures, and nine patients were lost to follow-up, leaving a cohort of 105 patients. Mean follow-up time was 26.8 months (range, six to 43 months). Visual acuity of 20/40 or better was found in 29 patients (27.6%) and 20/50 to 20/200 in 37 patients (35.2%). Reasons for poor visual outcome included cystoid macular edema in ten patients (9.5%), age-related macular degeneration in six patients (5.7%), and retinal detachment in four patients (3.8%). None of the patients developed lens decentration. There were no instances of hyphema and only one patient had a perioperative limited suprachoroidal hemorrhage. New-onset increase in intraocular pressure developed in 20 of 66 patients (30.3%). Analysis of the 39 patients with preoperative increase in intraocular pressure that required medical treatment demonstrated an improvement in 13 patients (33.3%), worsening in 12 patients (30.8%), and unchanged status in 14 patients (35.9%). The exposed haptic suture was covered by using one of the following three alternative methods: a conjunctival flap, a scleral flap, or a corneal tissue button. Exposure of the haptic suture through the conjunctiva was a complication in 21 patients (20%). Of these 16 (76.1%) occurred in the group with a conjunctival covering, five (23.8%) occurred in the group with a scleral flap, and none occurred in the corneal tissue button group. This study demonstrated that transscleral fixation of a posterior chamber lens is a viable option in the treatment of patients undergoing penetrating keratoplasty and intraocular lens implantation with absent capsular support.

Comments on “Sacrificial Symbolism in Animal Experimentation: Object or Pet?” By Arnold Arluke, with a Response by the Author

Anthrozoos II:2 carried on pages 98 through 117 an article based on ethnographic research conducted in animal-research laboratories. The paper argued that sacrifice is an ambivalent concept in the culture of animal experimentation, requiring both objectification of and identification with the laboratory animal. The author argued that, because of this ambivalence, laboratory animals are not accorded a single, uniform, and unchanging status but are seen simultaneously as objects and pets. The animals are objectified by incorporation into the protocol, by isolation, by transformation into commodities, and by situational definition. At the same time, laboratory workers develop relationships with the animals that resemble those between owners and pets. These relationships can be divided into four categories: enshrined pets, epitomized by pictures, cartoons, and objects of animals in the laboratory; liberated pets, epitomized by animals removed from the laboratory before experimentation; saved pets, epitomized ...

Sacrificial Symbolism in Animal Experimentation: Object or Pet?

AbstractBased on ethnographic research in biomedical laboratories, this paper argues that sacrifice is an ambivalent notion in the culture of animal experimentation, requiring both objectification of and identification with the animal. Because of this ambivalence, laboratory animals are not accorded a single, uniform, and unchanging status but seen simultaneously as objects and pets. Animals are objectified by incorporation into the protocol, by deindividualization, by commodification, by isolation, and by situational definition. At the same time, laboratory workers develop pet-like relationships with the animals, which may be treated as enshrined pets, liberated pets, saved pets, or martyred pets.

Status-Orientations in Nursing

THE CURRENT STATE of dissatisfaction, prompted by the need for status has become one of the collective assets of the profession of nursing. It means that nurses are no longer willing to be regarded merely as the handmaiden of the physician. It means that their professional association has developed a sense of autonomy, prepared to take its own informed stand on issues affecting the public health, rather than simply following the positions taken by the American Medical Association and the American Public Health Association. And it means that nurses do not accept the status currently assigned them as their unchanging and final status.