Vision 2020: A View of Our Energy Future

The Morning Address was given by The Honorable George Allen. “The Regulatory Framework: Where Are We Headed?” session by Eric Finkbeiner, Senior Adviser for Policy, Office of Governor Robert McDonnell; David Christian, Chief Executive Officer, Dominion Generation; and Professor Joel Eisen, University of Richmond School of Law. Professor Noah Sachs, University of Richmond School of Law, served as moderator. “The Future of Coal” session by John Lain, Partner at McGuireWoods LLP; Cale Jaffe, Senior Attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center; and W. Thomas Hudson, President of W. Thomas Hudson and Associates, Inc. and of the Virginia Coal Association. Stephen E. Taylor, Allen Chair Editor for the University of Richmond Law Review, served as moderator. “Nuclear Power: Is There a ‘Renaissance’?” session by Donald Irwin, Hunton & Williams; Christopher Paine, Director of Nuclear Program, Natural Resources Defense Council (invited); and Michael H. Montgomery, Vice President of Fuel Development, Lightbridge Corporation. Tricia Dunlap, Robert R. Merhige, Jr. Fellow at the University of Richmond School of Law, served as moderator. “Emerging Issues in Energy Policy” session by Mark Rosen, Deputy General Counsel, CNA Corporation; Jefferson Reynolds, Water Policy Director with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality; Kruskaia Sierra-Escalante, Senior Counsel for the International Finance Corporation; and Edward Lowe, General Manager for Renewable Energy Market Development, GE Energy. Andrea W. Wortzel, Counsel with Hunton & Williams and Vice Chair of the Environmental Law Section of the Virginia State Bar, served as moderator. The Closing Address was given by The Honorable Carol M. Browner, Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change and Former Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (invited)

Factors Associated with Revision Surgery after Internal Fixation of Hip Fractures

Background: Femoral neck fractures are associated with high rates of revision surgery after management with internal fixation. Using data from the Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trial evaluating methods of internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures, we investigated associations between baseline and surgical factors and the need for revision surgery to promote healing, relieve pain, treat infection or improve function over 24 months postsurgery. Additionally, we investigated factors associated with (1) hardware removal and (2) implant exchange from cancellous screws (CS) or sliding hip screw (SHS) to total hip arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, or another internal fixation device. Methods: We identified 15 potential factors a priori that may be associated with revision surgery, 7 with hardware removal, and 14 with implant exchange. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses in our investigation. Results: Factors associated with increased risk of revision surgery included: female sex, [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.50; P = 0.001], higher body mass index (fo

La producción, la reproducción y la salud de la mujer. Estudio de un caso de Oaxaca, México

Este trabajo describe como las presiones económicas del hogar y las motivaciones políticas de la comunidad interactúan para tener alta fertilidad, etc.\ua0 ya que son pocas las investigaciones que\ua0 se ha dedicado a las relaciones sociales entre los roles de producción y reproducción en la mujer latinoamericana

Does Participation in a Randomized Clinical Trial Change Outcomes? An Evaluation of Patients Not Enrolled in the SPRINT Trial

© Copyright 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Objectives: To determine the extent to which knowledge from clinical trial protocols is transferred to nonparticipating patients. Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a large clinical trial. Setting: Six level-1 international trauma centers. Methods: We compared rates and timing of reoperation in a subset of patients enrolled in the Study to Prospectively evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Fractures (SPRINT) to concurrent patients who were eligible but not enrolled. This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected trial data. The records of 6 of the original SPRINT centers were searched for non-SPRINT patients who underwent intramedullary nailing of a closed tibial fracture. The rate and timing of reoperation were compared. A P \u3c 0.05 was considered significant. Results: One hundred fourteen non-SPRINT patients were compared with 328 patients enrolled in SPRINT from those same sites. There were 7 reoperations (6.1%) in non-SPRINT patients versus 18 (5.2%) in SPRINT patients [odds ratio (OR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 3.13; P 0.811]. There was no difference in the time to reoperation between the SPRINT and non-SPRINT patients (6.2 vs. 6.8 months, 95% CI of the difference -3.8 to 2.6; P 0.685) or in the proportion of patients who underwent reoperation before 6 months (29% vs. 43%; OR 1.75; 95% CI 0.18 to 15.41; P 0.647). Conclusions: Patients not enrolled in SPRINT had similarly low rates of reoperation for nonunion, and the average time to reoperation for both groups was longer than 6 months. A 6-month waiting period may have allowed slow-to-heal fractures adequate time to heal, thereby reducing the rate of diagnosis of nonunion. As such, this waiting period could contribute to lower-than-expected reoperation rates for nonunion. It is possible that clinical trials may beneficially influence the care of nonenrolled patients