Options for expiring Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) land

The Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service periodically issues revisions to its publications. The most current edition is made available. For access to an earlier edition, if available for this title, please contact the Oklahoma State University Library Archives by email at [email protected] or by phone at 405-744-6311

A hepatitis C avidity test for determining recent and past infections in both plasma and dried blood spots

DBS testing has been used successfully to detect HCV antibody positive individuals. Determining how long someone has been infected is important for surveillance initiatives. Antibody avidity is a method that can be used to calculate recency of infection. A HCV avidity assay was evaluated for both plasma and DBS. Study design: To measure antibody avidity a commercial HCV ELISA was modified using 7 M urea. The plasma samples were split into: group 1 (recently infected N = 19), group 2 (chronic carrier N = 300) and group 3 (resolved infection N = 82). Mock DBS made from group 1 (N = 12), group 2 (N = 50), group 3 (N = 25) and two seroconverter panels were evaluated. 133 DBS taken from patients known to have a resolved infection or be a chronic carrier were also tested. The avidity assay cut-off was set at AI ≤ 30 for a recent infection. Using sequential samples the assay could detect a recent infection in the first 4–5 months from the point of infection. Most of the false positive results (AI < 30 among cases known not to have had recent infection) were detected among known resolved infections, in both the plasma and DBS; as a result, a testing algorithm has been designed incorporating both PCR and two dilution factors. The sensitivity and specificity of the assay on plasma was 100% and 99.3%, respectively, while DBS had 100% sensitivity and 98.3% specificity. The HCV avidity assay can be used to distinguish between chronic and recent infection using either plasma or DBS as the sample type

Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment

Background: Orthodontic treatment involves using fixed or removable appliances (dental braces) to correct the positions of teeth. The success of a fixed appliance depends partly on the metal attachments (brackets and bands) being glued to the teeth so that they do not become detached during treatment. Brackets (metal squares) are usually attached to teeth other than molars, where bands (metal rings that go round each tooth) are more commonly used. Orthodontic tubes (stainless steel tubes that allow wires to pass through them), are typically welded to bands but they may also be glued directly (bonded) to molars. Failure of brackets, bands and bonded molar tubes slows down the progress of treatment with a fixed appliance. It can also be costly in terms of clinical time, materials and time lost from education/work for the patient. This is an update of the Cochrane review first published in 2011. A new full search was conducted on 15 February 2017 but no new studies were identified. We have only updated the search methods section in this new version. The conclusions of this Cochrane review remain the same. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bonded molar tubes, and the relative effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bonded molar tubes versus adhesives used to attach bands, during fixed appliance treatment, in terms of: (1) how often the tubes (or bands) come off during treatment; and (2) whether they protect the bonded (or banded) teeth against decay. Search methods: The following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 15 February 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 1) in the Cochrane Library (searched 15 February 2017), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 15 February 2017), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 15 February 2017). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials of participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes, bonded to first or second permanent molars. Trials which compared any type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes (stainless steel or titanium) with any other adhesive, were included. Trials were also included where: (1) a tube was bonded to a molar tooth on one side of an arch and a band cemented to the same tooth type on the opposite side of the same arch; (2) molar tubes had been allocated to one tooth type in one patient group and molar bands to the same tooth type in another patient group. Data collection and analysis: The selection of papers, decision about eligibility and data extraction were carried out independently and in duplicate without blinding to the authors, adhesives used or results obtained. All disagreements were resolved by discussion. Main results: Two trials (n = 190), at low risk of bias, were included in the review and both presented data on first time failure at the tooth level. Pooling of the data showed a statistically significant difference in favour of molar bands, with a hazard ratio of 2.92 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.80 to 4.72). No statistically significant heterogeneity was shown between the two studies. Data on first time failure at the patient level were also available and showed statistically different difference in favour of molar bands (risk ratio 2.30; 95% CI 1.56 to 3.41) (risk of event for molar tubes = 57%; risk of event for molar bands 25%). One trial presented data on decalcification again showing a statistically significant difference in favour of molar bands. No other adverse events identified. Authors' conclusions: From the two well-designed and low risk of bias trials included in this review it was shown that the failure of molar tubes bonded with either a chemically-cured or light-cured adhesive was considerably higher than that of molar bands cemented with glass ionomer cement. One trial indicated that there was less decalcification with molar bands cemented with glass ionomer cement than with bonded molar tubes cemented with a light-cured adhesive. However, given there are limited data for this outcome, further evidence is required to draw more robust conclusions

Adhesives for fixed orthodontic bands

Background: Orthodontic treatment involves using fixed or removable appliances (dental braces) to correct the positions of teeth. It has been shown that the quality of treatment result obtained with fixed appliances is much better than with removable appliances. Fixed appliances are, therefore, favoured by most orthodontists for treatment. The success of a fixed orthodontic appliance depends on the metal attachments (brackets and bands) being attached securely to the teeth so that they do not become loose during treatment. Brackets are usually attached to the front and side teeth, whereas bands (metal rings that go round the teeth) are more commonly used on the back teeth (molars). A number of adhesives are available to attach bands to teeth and it is important to understand which group of adhesives bond most reliably, as well as reducing or preventing dental decay during the treatment period. :Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bands to teeth during fixed appliance treatment, in terms of: (1) how often the bands come off during treatment; and (2) whether they protect the banded teeth against decay during fixed appliance treatment. Search methods: The following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (searched 2 June 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 5) in the Cochrane Library (searched 2 June 2016), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 2 June 2016) and EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2 June 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. Selection criteria: Randomised and controlled clinical trials (RCTs and CCTs) (including split-mouth studies) of adhesives used to attach orthodontic bands to molar teeth were selected. Patients with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) who had bands attached to molars were included. Data collection and analysis: All review authors were involved in study selection, validity assessment and data extraction without blinding to the authors, adhesives used or results obtained. All disagreements were resolved by discussion. Main results: Five RCTs and three CCTs were identified as meeting the review's inclusion criteria. All the included trials were of split-mouth design. Four trials compared chemically cured zinc phosphate and chemically cured glass ionomer; three trials compared chemically cured glass ionomer cement with light cured compomer; one trial compared chemically cured glass ionomer with a chemically cured glass phosphonate. Data analysis was often inappropriate within the studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Authors' conclusions: There is insufficient high quality evidence with regard to the most effective adhesive for attaching orthodontic bands to molar teeth. Further RCTs are required

Research And Testing For Its Deployment And Operation

In this paper, the authors, although agreeing that deployment is the ultimate goal of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) research and funding, believe that there is not sufficient knowledge of how, why and when to deploy specific ITS functions They contend that continued research and testing (R &amp;T) is still necessary to assure effective future deployment. The article identifies critical needs for R &amp; T and is based to a large degree on the authors' experience in the California PATH research program

Lessons From Case Studies Of Advanced Transportation And Information Systems

This paper poses two key questions regarding ATMIS implementation: how are ATMIS services successfully implemented?, in what circumstances are ATMIS strategies cost-effective? The authors attempt to find answers by examining case studies of twelve jurisdictions. The answers should help others judge where and how ATMIS should be implemented. The first section of the paper identifies the requirements for successful ATMIS implementation and operation based on the case study findings. The second describes a diffusion pattern found in the case studies. The final section concludes that more is known about how to implement ATMIS than about whether implementation will be cost-effective and suggests devoting more resources to evaluation. The first requirement for successful ATMIS implementation is a need for improved traffic management. Given this need, there must also be leadership to initiate and organize a project. This leadership is most often found at the staff level. The leaders must have information. Information is obtained from reading, contact with other transportation professionals, and from consultants, who generally participate at some point in the implementation process. Funding is also needed, and many combinations of sources of funding are possible. Given these basic requirements, community support, multi-agency cooperation, and technical resources can be generated. ATMIS is first implemented in large, congested cities, particularly those with frequent surges of traffic due to sports or entertainment events. Smaller, nearby cities, seeing the success of ATMIS in these cities, subsequently implement ATMIS. More evaluation of actual ATMIS implementation is needed to provide a basis for determining the circumstances in which ATMIS is likely to be cost-effective

Lessons From Case Studies Of Advanced Transportation And Information Systems

This paper poses two key questions regarding ATMIS implementation: how are ATMIS services successfully implemented?, in what circumstances are ATMIS strategies cost-effective? The authors attempt to find answers by examining case studies of twelve jurisdictions. The answers should help others judge where and how ATMIS should be implemented. The first section of the paper identifies the requirements for successful ATMIS implementation and operation based on the case study findings. The second describes a diffusion pattern found in the case studies. The final section concludes that more is known about how to implement ATMIS than about whether implementation will be cost-effective and suggests devoting more resources to evaluation. The first requirement for successful ATMIS implementation is a need for improved traffic management. Given this need, there must also be leadership to initiate and organize a project. This leadership is most often found at the staff level. The leaders must have information. Information is obtained from reading, contact with other transportation professionals, and from consultants, who generally participate at some point in the implementation process. Funding is also needed, and many combinations of sources of funding are possible. Given these basic requirements, community support, multi-agency cooperation, and technical resources can be generated. ATMIS is first implemented in large, congested cities, particularly those with frequent surges of traffic due to sports or entertainment events. Smaller, nearby cities, seeing the success of ATMIS in these cities, subsequently implement ATMIS. More evaluation of actual ATMIS implementation is needed to provide a basis for determining the circumstances in which ATMIS is likely to be cost-effective.Highway communications, Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems, Express highways--Automation