38 research outputs found

    Global trends in typhoidal salmonellosis: A systematic review

    Get PDF
    Typhoid and paratyphoid fever continue to significantly contribute to global morbidity and mortality. Disease burden is higher in low-and middle-income settings where surveillance programs are rare and little systematic information exists at population level. This review evaluates national, regional, and global trends in the incidence of typhoid fever and of related morbidity and mortality. A literature search in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted in June 2016, followed by screening and data extraction in duplicate. Studies reporting blood culture estimates of typhoid or paratyphoid morbidity and mortality were included in the analysis. Five thousand five hundred sixty-three unique records were identified, of which 1978 were assessed for relevance with 219 records meeting the eligibility criteria. Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi was the most commonly reported organism (91%), with the occurrence of typhoidal Salmonella (either incidence or prevalence) being the most commonly reported outcome (78%), followed by typhoid fever mortality, ileal perforation morbidity, and perforation mortality, respectively. Fewer than 50% of studies stratified outcomes by age or urban/rural locality. Surveillance data were available from 29 countries and patient-focused studies were available from 32 countries. Our review presents a mixed picture with declines reported in many regions and settings but with large gaps in surveillance and published data. Regional trends show generally high incidence rates in South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and East Asia and Pacific where the disease is endemic in many countries. Significant increases have been reported in certain countries but should be explored in the context of long-term trends and underlying at-risk populations

    Assessing the nonequilibrium thermodynamics in a quenched quantum many-body system via single projective measurements

    Get PDF
    The authors are indebted to T. S. Batalhao, J. Goold, R. Serra, and Peter Talkner for invaluable discussions.We analyze the nature of the statistics of the work done on or by a quantum many-body system brought out of equilibrium. We show that, for the sudden quench and for an initial state that commutes with the initial Hamiltonian, it is possible to retrieve the whole nonequilibrium thermodynamics via single projective measurements of observables. We highlight, in a physically clear way, the qualitative implications for the statistics of work coming from considering processes described by operators that either commute or do not commute with the unperturbed Hamiltonian of a given system. We consider a quantum many-body system and derive an expression that allows us to give a physical interpretation, for a thermal initial state, to all of the cumulants of the work in the case of quenched operators commuting with the unperturbed Hamiltonian. In the commuting case, the observables that we need to measure have an intuitive physical meaning. Conversely, in the noncommuting case, we show that, although it is possible to operate fully within the single-measurement framework irrespectively of the size of the quench, some difficulties are faced in providing a clear-cut physical interpretation to the cumulants. This circumstance makes the study of the physics of the system nontrivial and highlights the nonintuitive phenomenology of the emergence of thermodynamics from the fully quantum microscopic description. We illustrate our ideas with the example of the Ising model in a transverse field showing the interesting behavior of the high-order statistical moments of the work distribution for a generic thermal state and linking them to the critical nature of the model itself.This work has been supported by a PERFEST grant (L. F.) from Universita degli Studi di Palermo, the Marie Curie Action, the UK EPSRC (EP/G004579/1 and EP/ L005026/1), the John Templeton Foundation (Grant ID 43467), the EU Collaborative Project TherMiQ (Grant Agreement No. 618074), and by a Marie Curie Intra European Fellowship within the 7th European Community Framework Programme through the project NeQuFlux Grant No. 623085 (M. C.). T. J. G. A. is supported by the European Commission, the European Social Fund, and the Region Calabria through the program POR Calabria FSE 2007-2013-Asse IV Capitale Umano-Obiettivo Operativo M2. A. X. acknowledges funding from the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851. Part of this work was supported by the COST Action MP1209 “Thermodynamics in the Quantum Regime.”peer-reviewe

    Worldwide Disparities in Recovery of Cardiac Testing 1 Year Into COVID-19

    Get PDF
    FUNDING SUPPORT AND AUTHOR DISCLOSURES Dr Williams is supported by the British Heart Foundation (FS/ICRF/ 20/26002). Dr Einstein has received speaker fees from Ionetix; has received consulting fees from W. L. Gore & Associates; has received authorship fees from Wolters Kluwer Healthcare – UpToDate; and has received grants or grants pending to his institution from Attralus, Canon Medical Systems, Eidos Therapeutics, GE Healthcare, Pfizer, Roche Medical Systems, W. L. Gore & Associates, and XyloCor Ther- apeutics. Dr Williams has received speaker fees from Canon Medical Systems. Dr Dorbala has received honoraria from Pfizer and GE Healthcare; and has received grants to her institution from Pfizer and GE Healthcare. Dr Sinitsyn has received congress speaker honoraria from Bayer, GE Healthcare, Siemens, and Philips. Dr Kudo has received research grants from Nihon Medi-physics and FUJIFILM Toyama Chemical. Dr Bucciarelli-Ducci is CEO (part-time) of the So- ciety for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance; and has received speaker fees from Circle Cardiovascular Imaging, Bayer, and Siemens Healthineers. All other authors have reported that they have no re- lationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

    International Impact of COVID-19 on the Diagnosis of Heart Disease

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has adversely affected diagnosis and treatment of noncommunicable diseases. Its effects on delivery of diagnostic care for cardiovascular disease, which remains the leading cause of death worldwide, have not been quantified. OBJECTIVES The study sought to assess COVID-19's impact on global cardiovascular diagnostic procedural volumes and safety practices. METHODS The International Atomic Energy Agency conducted a worldwide survey assessing alterations in cardiovascular procedure volumes and safety practices resulting from COVID-19. Noninvasive and invasive cardiac testing volumes were obtained from participating sites for March and April 2020 and compared with those from March 2019. Availability of personal protective equipment and pandemic-related testing practice changes were ascertained. RESULTS Surveys were submitted from 909 inpatient and outpatient centers performing cardiac diagnostic procedures, in 108 countries. Procedure volumes decreased 42% from March 2019 to March 2020, and 64% from March 2019 to April 2020. Transthoracic echocardiography decreased by 59%, transesophageal echocardiography 76%, and stress tests 78%, which varied between stress modalities. Coronary angiography (invasive or computed tomography) decreased 55% (p < 0.001 for each procedure). In multivariable regression, significantly greater reduction in procedures occurred for centers in countries with lower gross domestic product. Location in a low-income and lower-middle-income country was associated with an additional 22% reduction in cardiac procedures and less availability of personal protective equipment and telehealth. CONCLUSIONS COVID-19 was associated with a significant and abrupt reduction in cardiovascular diagnostic testing across the globe, especially affecting the world's economically challenged. Further study of cardiovascular outcomes and COVID-19-related changes in care delivery is warranted

    Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

    Get PDF
    Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection

    Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

    Get PDF
    IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

    Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

    The work of university research administrators: Praxis and professionalization

    No full text
    As part of a project on the social production of social science research, 19 research administrators (RAs) in five Canadian universities were interviewed about work, careers, and professionalization. While rarely featured in the higher education literature, RAs have become an important source of assistance to academics, who are increasingly expected to obtain and manage external research funding. RAs perform multiple roles, notably assisting with the complexities of grant-hunting as well as managing ethical clearance, knowledge mobilization, and related activities. Aspects normally associated with professionalization include organizations that control entry, higher degrees in the field, and clear career paths, all of which are somewhat compromised in the case of RAs. Nevertheless, most of the participants regard research administration as a profession, and we argue that it is more important to focus on the sensemaking and identity formation of these mostly female staff than to apply abstract criteria. Although their efforts do little to challenge a culture of performativity in the academy, and indeed may be regarded as supporting it, the RAs have defined for themselves a praxis dedicated to easing the burdens of the academics, helping one another, and contributing to the greater good of the university and the research enterprise.This work has been funded in part by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (435–2017–0104)
    corecore