Correlation between two physical activity programs in the gait of sedentary elderly subjects

Objectives: To assess the effect of exercise on gait using two different programs: a group of aerobic exercises (Group A, n = 18) and a group of flexibility and balance exercises (Group B, n = 19). Methods: A casualized controlled study, in which each sample controlled itself, was undertaken. The sample comprised 37 male and female subjects, aged from 60 to 90 years, from the outpatient clinic of the Geriatrics Unit of Hospital das Clínicas of Faculdade de Medicina of Universidade de São Paulo; the patients were sedentary and had not exercised regularly during the past six months. Results: Improvement of gait was seen mainly in the group that did specific exercises. Conclusion: The results of this study underline the importance of physical exercises in sedentary elderly subjects, but show the need for programming the exercises towards specific goals, which can optimize the results of this tool of health promotion for the elderly

Effect of Intraoperative High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) With Recruitment Maneuvers vs Low PEEP on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Obese Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE An intraoperative higher level of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) with alveolar recruitment maneuvers improves respiratory function in obese patients undergoing surgery, but the effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain

Effect of intraoperative high Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) with recruitment maneuvers vs low PEEP on postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients : a randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE An intraoperative higher level of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) with alveolar recruitment maneuvers improves respiratory function in obese patients undergoing surgery, but the effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a higher level of PEEP with alveolar recruitment maneuvers decreases postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients undergoing surgery compared with a lower level of PEEP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized clinical trial of 2013 adults with body mass indices of 35 or greater and substantial risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who were undergoing noncardiac, nonneurological surgery under general anesthesia. The trial was conducted at 77 sites in 23 countries from July 2014-February 2018; final follow-up: May 2018. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to the high level of PEEP group (n = 989), consisting of a PEEP level of 12 cm H2O with alveolar recruitment maneuvers (a stepwise increase of tidal volume and eventually PEEP) or to the low level of PEEP group (n = 987), consisting of a PEEP level of 4 cm H2O. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with a tidal volume of 7 mL/kg of predicted body weight. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomewas a composite of pulmonary complications within the first 5 postoperative days, including respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, bronchospasm, new pulmonary infiltrates, pulmonary infection, aspiration pneumonitis, pleural effusion, atelectasis, cardiopulmonary edema, and pneumothorax. Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were intraoperative complications, including hypoxemia (oxygen desaturation with SpO(2) 1 minute). RESULTS Among 2013 adults who were randomized, 1976 (98.2%) completed the trial (mean age, 48.8 years; 1381 [69.9%] women; 1778 [90.1%] underwent abdominal operations). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 211 of 989 patients (21.3%) in the high level of PEEP group compared with 233 of 987 patients (23.6%) in the low level of PEEP group (difference, -2.3%[95% CI, -5.9% to 1.4%]; risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.04]; P =.23). Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 were not significantly different between the high and low level of PEEP groups, and 3 were significantly different, including fewer patients with hypoxemia (5.0% in the high level of PEEP group vs 13.6% in the low level of PEEP group; difference, -8.6%[95% CI, -11.1% to 6.1%]; P <.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among obese patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia, an intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategy with a higher level of PEEP and alveolar recruitment maneuvers, compared with a strategy with a lower level of PEEP, did not reduce postoperative pulmonary complications

Effect of Intraoperative High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) With Recruitment Maneuvers vs Low PEEP on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Obese Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial (vol 321, pg 2292, 2019)

status: publishe

Underlying Event measurements in pp collisions at root s=0.9 and 7 TeV with the ALICE experiment at the LHC

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)We present measurements of Underlying Event observables in pp collisions at root s = 0 : 9 and 7 TeV. The analysis is performed as a function of the highest charged-particle transverse momentum p(T),L-T in the event. Different regions are defined with respect to the azimuthal direction of the leading (highest transverse momentum) track: Toward, Transverse and Away. The Toward and Away regions collect the fragmentation products of the hardest partonic interaction. The Transverse region is expected to be most sensitive to the Underlying Event activity. The study is performed with charged particles above three different p(T) thresholds: 0.15, 0.5 and 1.0 GeV/c. In the Transverse region we observe an increase in the multiplicity of a factor 2-3 between the lower and higher collision energies, depending on the track p(T) threshold considered. Data are compared to PYTHIA 6.4, PYTHIA 8.1 and PHOJET. On average, all models considered underestimate the multiplicity and summed p(T) in the Transverse region by about 10-30%.7Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation from LisbonSwiss Fonds Kidagan, ArmeniaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos (FINEP)Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC)Chinese Ministry of Education (CMOE)Ministry of Science and Technology of China (MSTC)Ministry of Education and Youth of the Czech RepublicDanish Natural Science Research CouncilCarlsberg FoundationDanish National Research FoundationEuropean Research Council under European CommunityHelsinki Institute of PhysicsAcademy of FinlandFrench CNRS-IN2P3Region Pays de LoireRegion AlsaceRegion AuvergneCEA, FranceGerman BMBFHelmholtz AssociationGeneral Secretariat for Research and Technology, Ministry of Development, GreeceHungarian OTKANational Office for Research and Technology (NKTH)Department of Atomic EnergyDepartment of Science and Technology of the Government of IndiaIstituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN) of ItalyMEXT, JapanJoint Institute for Nuclear Research, DubnaNational Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)CONACYTDGAPA, MexicoALFA-ECHELEN Program (High-Energy physics Latin-American-European Network)Stichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der Materie (FOM)Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), NetherlandsResearch Council of Norway (NFR)Polish Ministry of Science and Higher EducationNational Authority for Scientific Research - NASR (Autoritatea Nationala pentru Cercetare Stiintifica - ANCS)Federal Agency of Science of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russian FederationInternational Science and Technology Center, Russian Academy of SciencesRussian Federal Agency of Atomic EnergyRussian Federal Agency for Science and InnovationsCERN-INTASMinistry of Education of SlovakiaDepartment of Science and Technology, South AfricaCIEMATEELAMinisterio de Educacion y Ciencia of SpainXunta de Galicia (Conselleria de Educacion)CEADENCubaenergia, CubaIAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency)Swedish Reseach Council (VR)Knut & Alice Wallenberg Foundation (KAW)Ukraine Ministry of Education and ScienceUnited Kingdom Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)The United States Department of EnergyUnited States National Science FoundationState of TexasState of OhioFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq