11 research outputs found
Single Dose Gadolinium Contrast for 3 T Late Gadolinium Enhancement MRI -Intra-individual Comparison with Conventional Double Dose at 1.5 T MRI-
ํ์๋
ผ๋ฌธ (์์ฌ)-- ์์ธ๋ํ๊ต ๋ํ์ : ์ํ๊ณผ, 2015. 2. ์ดํ.Purpose: 3 T late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging is expected to provide comparable image quality to 1.5 T even with reduction of gadolinium contrast, thanks to superior signal to noise ratio and longer T1 relaxation time of normal myocardium. This prospective study was designed to perform intra-individual comparison of 3 T MR with use of 0.1 mmol/kg of gadoterate meglumine to 1.5 T MR with use of 0.2 mmol/kg of the same gadolinium contrast for the assessment of myocardial infarction.
Materials and Methods: In this prospective study, a total of ten patients (M:F = 8:2mean age, 62.5 ยฑ 11.8 years) diagnosed as old myocardial infarction were examined at 3 T MR with single dose within two weeks after 1.5 T conventional double dose MR. A single representative short-axis image was acquired at three-time point temporal scans (10 minute, 15 minute and 20 minute) after administration of gadolinium agent (Uniray, gadoterate meglumine, Dongkook Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd). Two contrast to noise ratios (CNRs) between infarcted and normal myocardium and between infarcted and left ventricular (LV) cavity were calculated and compared intra-individually at each temporal scan. Two independent readers assessed infarct size semiautomatically by using a threshold of 6 standard deviations above the mean signal intensity of the remote myocardium. The interobserver reproducibility was also evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
Results: Despite the usage of single dose of gadolinium, the mean values of infarcted myocardium tended to be higher at 3 T MR than 1.5 T MR with double dose at each time scan. 3 T LGE images with the single dose of gadolinium showed no significant difference in CNR between infarcted and normal myocardium at each time scan (all, p > 0.05). The CNR between infarcted myocardium and LV cavity was significantly better at 10 minute scan, compared to that of 1.5 T double dose (12.4 ยฑ 8.2 vs. 7.6 ยฑ 4.5, p = 0.049) but there were no differences at 15 and 20 minute scan. The measurement of relative infarct size was not significantly different between 1.5 T and 3 T MR by both observers 1 and 2 (all, p > 0.05). Interobserver reproducibility was excellent at 3 T single-dose MR (ICC range: 0.962-0.968) and good or excellent at 1.5 T double-dose MR (ICC range: 0.769-0.866).
Conclusions: LGE imaging at 3 T with single-dose contrast is as effective as 1.5 T conventional double-dose MR for the delineation of infarcted myocardium from non-infarcted myocardium and is superior for detection of infarcted myocardium from blood cavity at 10 minute scan. Therefore, 3 T LGE imaging using a single dose of gadolinium is expected to not only reduce risk of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis but also help to delineate subendocardial infarctionIntroduction 1
Materials and Methods 4
Results 8
Discussion 24
Conclusion 29
Acknowledgements 30
References 31
Abstract in Korean 38Maste
Long-term benefits of positive emotions on psyhological, physical and relational well-being
ํ์๋
ผ๋ฌธ (์์ฌ)-- ์์ธ๋ํ๊ต ๋ํ์ : ์ฌ๋ฆฌํ๊ณผ, 2011.8. ์ต์ธ์ฒ .Maste
๊ณ ์ถ์ ์ ์จ ์ ๋์ฑ ์นผ๋ชจ๋๋ฆฐ cDNA ํด๋ก ์ ํน์ฑ ๋ถ์
ํ์๋
ผ๋ฌธ(์์ฌ)--์์ธ๋ํ๊ต ๋ํ์ :์๋ช
๊ณผํ๋ถ,2004.Maste
Characterization of transposon Tn1549 associated with the vanB2 gene cluster in enterococci isolated from Korea
Thesis (master`s)--์์ธ๋ํ๊ต ๋ํ์ :์์ํ๊ณผ ์์๋ฏธ์๋ฌผํ ์ ๊ณต,2003.Maste
One-Person Household Womenโs Problem Drinking in Early Adulthood : Associations with Alcohol Expectancy, Loneliness, Stress, and Depression.
๋ณธ ์ฐ๊ตฌ๋ ์ฐ๋ฆฌ๋๋ผ ์ฌ์ฑ๋ค์ ์์ฃผ๊ฐ ์ฆ๊ฐํ๋ ์ํฉ์์ ์ฑ์ธ์ด๊ธฐ 1์ธ๊ฐ๊ตฌ ์ฌ์ฑ์ ํผ์ ์ ํฌํจํ ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ ์คํ๋ฅผ ํ์
ํ๊ณ , ์ฑ์ธ์ด๊ธฐ 1์ธ๊ฐ๊ตฌ ์ฌ์ฑ์ ์ ์ ๊ฑด๊ฐ์์ ๋ฐ ์์ฃผ๊ธฐ๋์ ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ๊ฐ์ ๊ด๊ณ๋ฅผ ํตํฉ์ ์ผ๋ก ํ์ธํ๊ณ ์ ์๋๋ ์์ ์ ์กฐ์ฌ์ฐ๊ตฌ์ด๋ค. ๋ณธ ์ฐ๊ตฌ์ ๊ฐ๋
์ ๊ธฐํ์ Bandura (1986)์ ์ฌํ์ธ์ง์ด๋ก (social cognitive theory)์ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ์ผ๋ก ํ์์ผ๋ฉฐ, ์ฑ์ธ์ด๊ธฐ 1์ธ๊ฐ๊ตฌ ์ฌ์ฑ์ ์ธ๊ตฌ์ฌํํ์ ํน์ฑ, ์ผ๋ฐ ๋ฐ ์ ์ ๊ฑด๊ฐ๊ด๋ จ ํน์ฑ, ์์ฃผ๊ด๋ จ ํน์ฑ์ ์กฐ์ฌํ์๋ค. ํนํ ์ ์ ๊ด๋ จ ์์ธ์ธ ์์ฃผ๊ธฐ๋, ์ธ๋ก์, ์คํธ๋ ์ค, ์ฐ์ธ๊ณผ ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ ์์ค์ ์ธก์ ํ์๋ค. ์๋ฃ ์์ง์ 2020๋
2์ 24์ผ๋ถํฐ 4์ 6์ผ๊น์ง ๋ง 19์ธ ์ด์์์ 40์ธ ๋ฏธ๋ง์ ์์ฃผ๋ ฅ์ด ์๋ 1์ธ๊ฐ๊ตฌ ์ฌ์ฑ์ ๋์์ผ๋ก ์จ๋ผ์ธ ์ค๋ฌธ์ ์ํํ์๋ค. ํ์๋ 450๋ช
์ ์๋ฃ ์ค ์์ฃผ๊ธฐ๋ ๋ฐ ์ฃผ์๋ณ์์ ๋ํด ๋ถ์ถฉ๋ถํ ์๋ต์ ํ 100๋ช
์ ์๋ฃ๋ฅผ ์ ์ธํ๊ณ ์ด 350๋ช
์ ์ฐ๊ตฌ ์๋ฃ๋ฅผ ๋ถ์์ ์ฌ์ฉํ์์ผ๋ฉฐ, ์์ง๋ ์๋ฃ๋ SPSS 25.0 ํ๋ก๊ทธ๋จ์ ์ด์ฉํ์ฌ ์ ์์์ค .05์์ ๊ธฐ์ ํต๊ณ, independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, binary logistic regression analysis๋ก ๋ถ์ํ์๋ค. ์ฐ๊ตฌ์ ์ฃผ์ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ ๋ค์๊ณผ ๊ฐ๋ค. 1. ๋ณธ ์ฐ๊ตฌ ์ฐธ์ฌ์ 350๋ช
์ ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ ํ๊ท ์ ์๋ 11.73ยฑ9.32์ ์ด์๊ณ , ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ๊ตฐ์ ์ ์ฒด ์ฐธ์ฌ์์ 68.3%์ธ 239๋ช
์ด์๋ค. ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ๊ตฐ ๊ด๋ จ ์์ธ์ผ๋ก๋ ์ฐธ์ฌ์๊ฐ ์ฌํ๊ฒฝ์ ์ ์ํ โ์โ์ผ ๋(OR=2.84, 95% CI: 1.17~6.92, p = .021), ํ์ฌ ํก์ฐ์(OR=2.56, 95% CI: 1.15~5.73, p = .022)์ด๊ฑฐ๋ ๊ณผ๊ฑฐ ํก์ฐ ๊ฒฝํ์ด ์์ ๋(OR=3.33, 95% CI: 1.14~9.69, p = .028), ํผ์ ๊ฒฝํ์ด ์์ ๋(OR=2.37, 95% CI: 1.19~4.73, p = .015), ๊ธ์ ์ ์์ฃผ ๊ธฐ๋๊ฐ ์ฆ๊ฐํ ๋(OR=1.02, 95% CI: 1.00~1.04, p = .031), ๋ถ์ ์ ์์ฃผ ๊ธฐ๋๊ฐ ์ฆ๊ฐํ ๋(OR=1.04, 95% CI: 1.01~1.06, p < .001), ์ฐ์ธ ์ง๋จ์ ์ํ ๋(OR=2.10, 95% CI: 1.11~4.00, p = .023) ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ๊ตฐ์ด ๋ ํ๋ฅ ์ด ์ฆ๊ฐํ๋ ๊ฒ์ผ๋ก ํ์ธ๋์๋ค. 2. ํผ์ ๊ฒฝํ์ด ์๋ 291๋ช
์ ๋์์๋ง์ ์ ๋ณํ์ฌ ํผ์ ์ ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ๊ตฐ ๊ด๋ จ ์์ธ์ ํ์
ํ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ ์ฌํ๊ฒฝ์ ์ ์ํ๊ฐ '์'์ผ ๋(OR=4.21, 95% CI: 1.28~13.87, p = .018), ํ์ฌ ํก์ฐ์์ด๊ฑฐ๋(OR=3.90, 95% CI: 1.57~9.66, p = .003), ๊ณผ๊ฑฐ ํก์ฐ ๊ฒฝํ์ด ์๋ ์์ผ ๋(OR=4.67, 95% CI: 1.50~14.55, p = .008), ๋ถ์ ์ ์์ฃผ ๊ธฐ๋๊ฐ ์ฆ๊ฐํ ๋(OR=1.04, 95% CI: 1.02~1.07, p = .001), ์ฐ์ธ ์ง๋จ์ ์ํ ๋(OR=2.27, 95% CI: 1.09~4.74, p = .028) ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ๊ตฐ์ด ๋ ํ๋ฅ ์ด ์ฆ๊ฐํ์๋ค. ์์ฃผ๊ด๋ จ ์์ธ ์ค์์๋ ์์ฃผ ์ ์ฃผ๋ก ํผ์ ์ ํ๋ ๊ฒฝ์ฐ(OR=0.40, 95% CI: 0.19~0.87, p = .021), 1ํ ์์ฃผ๋์ด 3์ ๋ฏธ๋ง์ ๋นํด 3~6์ ์์ฃผํ ๊ฒฝ์ฐ(OR=7.11, 95% CI: 2.35~21.54, p = .001), ์ฃผ๋น 1ํ ๋ฏธ๋ง์ ๋นํด 1~2ํ ์์ฃผํ ๊ฒฝ์ฐ(OR=4.93, 95% CI: 1.92~12.64, p = .001), ์ต๊ทผ 6๊ฐ์๊ฐ ํผ์ ๋์ด ์ฆ๊ฐํ ๊ฒฝ์ฐ(OR=3.03, 95% CI: 1.05~8.77, p = .040) ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ๊ตฐ์ด ๋ ํ๋ฅ ์ด ์ฆ๊ฐํ์๋ค. ๋ณธ ์ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์์ ํ์ธ๋ ์ฑ์ธ์ด๊ธฐ 1์ธ๊ฐ๊ตฌ ์ฌ์ฑ์ ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ ์คํ์ ์ ์ ๊ฑด๊ฐ ์์ค, ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ๊ตฐ๊ณผ ๊ด๋ จ๋ ์์ธ์ ๋ฐํ์ผ๋ก ๋์์์ ํ๊ฒฝ์ ์์, ์ ์ ๊ฑด๊ฐ์ ์์, ์์ฃผ ์ํฉ์ ํตํฉ์ ์ผ๋ก ๊ณ ๋ คํ ์๋ฐฉ์ ๋ฌธ์ ์์ฃผ ์ค์ฌ์์ ๊ฐ๋ฐ์ด ํ์ํ๋ค. ํนํ ์ง์ญ์ฌํ์์ โํผ์ โ์ ๋น๋กฏํ 1์ธ๊ฐ๊ตฌ์ ํน์ฑ์ ๊ณ ๋ คํ ํ๋ก๊ทธ๋จ์ ํจ๊ณผ์ ์ผ๋ก ์ ๊ณตํ๊ธฐ ์ํ ์ ์ ๊ฑด๊ฐ ๊ฐํธ์ฌ์ ์ ๋ต ์๋ฆฝ์ด ํ์ํ๋ค.
The aims of this study were to identify the level of one-person household womenโs drinking problem in early adulthood and examine the relationships of mental health factors, alcohol expectancy with problem drinking. The conceptual framework is based on Banduraโs social cognitive theory (1986). This study examined the general characteristics including the sociodemographic characteristics, health-related characteristics, drinking-related characteristics and alcohol expectancy, loneliness (Korean version of revised UCLA Loneliness Scale, RULS-K), stress (Perceived Stress Scale, PSS), depression (Korean version of Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale-Revised, K-CESD-R), and problem drinking level (Korean version of Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test, AUDIT-K). The data were collected through an online survey of one-person women aged 19 to under 40 from February 24 to April 6, 2020. Total 450 data were collected and 350 data, were analyzed after excluding 100 incomplete responses. Descriptive statistics, independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, binary logistic regression were conducted using SPSS 25.0 program. The main findings of the study are as follows: 1. The average score of problem drinking on the AUDIT-K was 11.73ยฑ9.32, and the problem drinking group was 239 participants (68.3%) of the total 350 participants. The regression model shows that socioeconomic status โhighโ (OR=2.84, 95% CI: 1.17~6.92, p = .021), current smoker (OR=2.56, 95% CI: 1.15~5.73, p = .022), previous smoker (OR=3.33, 95% CI: 1.14~9.69, p = .028), past experience of solitary drinking (OR=2.37, 95% CI: 1.19~4.73, p = .015), positive alcohol expectancy (OR=1.02, 95% CI: 1.00~1.04, p = .031), negative alcohol expectancy (OR=1.04, 95% CI: 1.01~1.06, p < .001), and depressed group (OR=2.10, 95% CI: 1.11~4.00, p = .023) are all positively associated with the problem drinking group. 2. Additional a binary regression analysis was conducted by selecting 291 participants who had experience of solitary drinking. As a result, the socioeconomic status 'high' (OR=4.21, 95% CI: 1.28~13.87, p = .018), current smokers (OR=3.90, 95% CI: 1.57~9.66, p = .003), previous smokers (OR=4.67, 95% CI: 1.50~14.55, p = .008), negative alcohol expectancy (OR=1.04, 95% CI: 1.02~1.07, p = .001), and the depression group (OR=2.27, 95% CI: 1.09~4.74, p = .028) were positively related to the problem drinking group. Our study findings show the significance of mental health factors related to problem drinking in one-person household young women. Based on the results of this study, we should develop interventions to prevent problem drinking by comprehensively considering environmental factors, mental health factors and drinking context of one-person household women in early adulthood.open์