168 research outputs found

    Sixty Years of Manned Spaceflight—Incidents and Accidents Involving Astronauts between Launch and Landing

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Since Gagarin became the first human to travel into space and complete one orbit around the Earth, on 12 April 1961, the number of manned spaceflights has increased significantly. Spaceflight is still complex and has potential risk for incidents and accidents. The aim of this study was to analyze how safe it is for humans to travel in space. Objectives: This paper, therefore, summarizes incidents and accidents covering the six decades of manned spaceflight (1961–2020). Material and methods: Extensive PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar searches were made with search strings of “incidents”, “accident”, “spaceflight”, and “orbit”, and including all vehicles so far. Search terms were combined by AND or OR in search strings. Of the results obtained, studies which evaluated manned spaceflight were included in the study. Data from the National Aeronautics Space Agency (NASA), the Russian Space Agency (ROSCOSMOS), the European Space Agency (ESA), and the Chinese Space Agency (CNSA), as well as from the Virgin Galactic and the SpaceX databases, were searched to complete data and to identify all the accomplished manned spaceflights, as well as all incidents and accidents that have occurred in the specific period. Search results were compared to findings on Wikipedia, Encyclopedia Astronautica, and other public webpages. Reference lists of included articles/homepages were also included for further potential data. Results: From 1961–2020, our data revealed an increasing number of manned space flights, n = 327. The number of times an astronaut has been sent to space, n = 1294, resulted in an accumulated n = 19,414 days spent in space. The number of days spent in orbit has constantly increased from 1961 until today. The number of incidents (altogether n = 36) and accidents (altogether n = 5) has constantly decreased. The number of astronauts who have died during spaceflight is represented by n = 19. The current statistical fatality rate is 5.8% (deaths per spaceflight) with the highest fatality rate in the 1960s (0.013 deaths/day spent in space), and the lowest rates in the 1990s and the period from 2010 until the present (no deaths). The most dangerous phases of spaceflight are launch, landing and staying in orbit. Altogether, n = 12 incidents (incident rate per spaceflight: 0.04) and one accident (accident rate: 0.003) during launch have been reported, n = 9 incidents (incident rate: 0.03) and two accidents (accident rate: 0.006) have been reported during landing and n = 10 incidents (incident rate: 0.03) have been reported in orbit. Discussion: Manned spaceflight over the last six decades has become significantly safer. Since 2003, no astronaut fatality has been reported. With greater international cooperation and maintaining of the International Space Station (ISS), the number of manned spaceflights and days spent in space has constantly increased, with constantly lower rates of incidents and accident

    Influence of 30 and 60 Minutes of Hypobaric Hypoxia in Simulated Altitude of 15,000 ft on Human Proteome Profile

    Get PDF
    The human body reacts to hypobaric hypoxia, e.g., during a stay at high altitude, with several mechanisms of adaption. Even short-time exposition to hypobaric hypoxia leads to complex adaptions. Proteomics facilitates the possibility to detect changes in metabolism due to changes in proteins. The present study aims to identify time-dependent changes in protein expression due to hypobaric hypoxia for 30 and 60 min at a simulated altitude of 15,000 ft. N = 80 male subjects were randomized and assigned into four different groups: 40 subjects to ground control for 30 (GC30) and 60 min (GC60) and 40 subjects to 15,000 ft for 30 (HH30) and 60 min (HH60). Subjects in HH30 and HH60 were exposed to hypobaric hypoxia in a pressure chamber (total pressure: 572 hPa) equivalent to 15,000 ft for 30 vs. 60 min, respectively. Drawn blood was centrifuged and plasma frozen (−80 °C) until proteomic analysis. After separation of high abundant proteins, protein expression was analyzed by 2-DIGE and MALDI-TOF. To visualize the connected signaling cascade, a bio-informatical network analysis was performed. The present study was approved by the ethical committee of the University of Cologne, Germany. The study registry number is NCT03823677. In comparing HH30 to GC30, a total of seven protein spots had a doubled expression, and 22 spots had decreased gene expression. In a comparison of HH60 to GC60, a total of 27 protein spots were significantly higher expressed. HH60, as compared to GC30, revealed that a total of 37 spots had doubled expression. Vice versa, 12 spots were detected, which were higher expressed in GC30 vs. HH60. In comparison to GC, HH60 had distinct differences in the number of differential protein spots (noticeably more proteins due to longer exposure to hypoxia). There are indicators that changes in proteins are dependent on the length of hypobaric hypoxia. Some proteins associated with hemostasis were differentially expressed in the 60 min comparison

    Air travel and COVID-19 prevention in the pandemic and peri-pandemic period: A narrative review

    Get PDF
    Air travel during the COVID-19 pandemic is challenging for travellers, airlines, airports, health authorities, and governments. We reviewed multiple aspects of COVID peri-pandemic air travel, including data on traveller numbers, peri-flight prevention, and testing recommendations and in-flight SARS-CoV-2 transmission, photo-epidemiology of mask use, the pausing of air travel to mass gathering events, and quarantine measures and their effectiveness. Flights are reduced by 43% compared to 2019. Hygiene measures, mask use, and distancing are effective, while temperature screening has been shown to be unreliable. Although the risk of in-flight transmission is considered to be very low, estimated at one case per 27 million travellers, confirmed in-flight cases have been published. Some models exist and predict minimal risk but fail to consider human behavior and airline procedures variations. Despite aircraft high-efficiency filtering, there is some evidence that passengers within two rows of an index case are at higher risk. Air travel to mass gatherings should be avoided. Antigen testing is useful but impaired by time lag to results. Widespread application of solutions such as saliva-based, rapid testing or even detection with the help of “sniffer dogs” might be the way forward. The “traffic light system” for traveling, recently introduced by the Council of the European Union is a first step towards normalization of air travel. Quarantine of travellers may delay introduction or re-introduction of the virus, or may delay the peak of transmission, but the effect is small and there is limited evidence. New protocols detailing on-arrival, rapid testing and tracing are indicated to ensure that restricted movement is pragmatically implemented. Guidelines from airlines are non-transparent. Most airlines disinfect their flights and enforce wearing masks and social distancing to a certain degree. A layered approach of non-pharmaceutical interventions, screening and testing procedures, implementation and adherence to distancing, hygiene measures and mask use at airports, in-flight and throughout the entire journey together with pragmatic post-flight testing and tracing are all effective measures that can be implemented. Ongoing research and systematic review are indicated to provide evidence on the utility of preventive measures and to help answer the question “is it safe to fly?“

    Randomized Comparison of Two new Methods for Chest Compressions during CPR in Microgravity – A Manikin Study

    Get PDF
    Background: Although there have been no reported cardiac arrests in space to date, the risk of severe medical events occurring during long-duration spaceflights is a major concern. These critical events can endanger both the crew as well as the mission and include cardiac arrest, which would require cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Thus far, five methods to perform CPR in microgravity have been proposed. However, each method seems insufficient to some extent and not applicable at all locations in a spacecraft. The aim of the present study is to describe and gather data for two new CPR methods in microgravity. Materials and Methods: A randomized, controlled trial (RCT) compared two new methods for CPR in a free-floating underwater setting. Paramedics performed chest compressions on a manikin (Ambu Man, Ambu, Germany) using two new methods for a free-floating position in a parallel-group design. The first method (Schmitz–Hinkelbein method) is similar to conventional CPR on earth, with the patient in a supine position lying on the operator’s knees for stabilization. The second method (Cologne method) is similar to the first, but chest compressions are conducted with one elbow while the other hand stabilizes the head. The main outcome parameters included the total number of chest compressions (n) during 1 min of CPR (compression rate), the rate of correct chest compressions (%), and no-flow time (s). The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04354883). Results: Fifteen volunteers (age 31.0 ± 8.8 years, height 180.3 ± 7.5 cm, and weight 84.1 ± 13.2 kg) participated in this study. Compared to the Cologne method, the Schmitz–Hinkelbein method showed superiority in compression rates (100.5 ± 14.4 compressions/min), correct compression depth (65 ± 23%), and overall high rates of correct thoracic release after compression (66% high, 20% moderate, and 13% low). The Cologne method showed correct depth rates (28 ± 27%) but was associated with a lower mean compression rate (73.9 ± 25.5/min) and with lower rates of correct thoracic release (20% high, 7% moderate, and 73% low). Conclusions: Both methods are feasible without any equipment and could enable immediate CPR during cardiac arrest in microgravity, even in a single-helper scenario. The Schmitz–Hinkelbein method appears superior and could allow the delivery of high-quality CPR immediately after cardiac arrest with sufficient quality

    The accuracy of pulse oximetry in emergency department patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: a retrospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pulse oximetry is routinely used to continuously and noninvasively monitor arterial oxygen saturation (SaO<sub>2</sub>) in critically ill patients. Although pulse oximeter oxygen saturation (SpO<sub>2</sub>) has been studied in several patient populations, including the critically ill, its accuracy has never been studied in emergency department (ED) patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Sepsis results in characteristic microcirculatory derangements that could theoretically affect pulse oximeter accuracy. The purposes of the present study were twofold: 1) to determine the accuracy of pulse oximetry relative to SaO2 obtained from ABG in ED patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, and 2) to assess the impact of specific physiologic factors on this accuracy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This analysis consisted of a retrospective cohort of 88 consecutive ED patients with severe sepsis who had a simultaneous arterial blood gas and an SpO<sub>2 </sub>value recorded. Adult ICU patients that were admitted from any Calgary Health Region adult ED with a pre-specified, sepsis-related admission diagnosis between October 1, 2005 and September 30, 2006, were identified. Accuracy (SpO<sub>2 </sub>- SaO<sub>2</sub>) was analyzed by the method of Bland and Altman. The effects of hypoxemia, acidosis, hyperlactatemia, anemia, and the use of vasoactive drugs on bias were determined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The cohort consisted of 88 subjects, with a mean age of 57 years (19 - 89). The mean difference (SpO<sub>2 </sub>- SaO<sub>2</sub>) was 2.75% and the standard deviation of the differences was 3.1%. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that hypoxemia (SaO<sub>2 </sub>< 90) significantly affected pulse oximeter accuracy. The mean difference was 4.9% in hypoxemic patients and 1.89% in non-hypoxemic patients (p < 0.004). In 50% (11/22) of cases in which SpO<sub>2 </sub>was in the 90-93% range the SaO2 was <90%. Though pulse oximeter accuracy was not affected by acidoisis, hyperlactatementa, anemia or vasoactive drugs, these factors worsened precision.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Pulse oximetry overestimates ABG-determined SaO<sub>2 </sub>by a mean of 2.75% in emergency department patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. This overestimation is exacerbated by the presence of hypoxemia. When SaO<sub>2 </sub>needs to be determined with a high degree of accuracy arterial blood gases are recommended.</p

    Performance of the final Event Builder for the ATLAS Experiment

    Get PDF
    Event data from proton-proton collisions at the LHC will be selected by the ATLAS experiment in a three level trigger system, which reduces the initial bunch crossing rate of 40 MHz at its first two trigger levels (LVL1+LVL2) to ~3 kHz. At this rate the Event-Builder collects the data from all Read-Out system PCs (ROSs) and provides fully assembled events to the the Event-Filter (EF), which is the third level trigger, to achieve a further rate reduction to ~200 Hz for permanent storage. The Event-Builder is based on a farm of O(100) PCs, interconnected via Gigabit Ethernet to O(150) ROSs. These PCs run Linux and multi-threaded software applications implemented in C++. All the ROSs and one third of the Event-Builder PCs are already installed and commissioned. We report on performance tests on this initial system, which show promising results to reach the final data throughput required for the ATLAS experiment

    ATLAS DataFlow: the read-out subsystem, results from trigger and data-acquisition system testbed studies and from modeling

    Full text link
    In the ATLAS experiment at the LHC, the output of readout hardware specific to each subdetector will be transmitted to buffers, located on custom made PCI cards ("ROBINs"). The data consist of fragments of events accepted by the first-level trigger at a maximum rate of 100 kHz. Groups of four ROBINs will be hosted in about 150 Read-Out Subsystem (ROS) PCs. Event data are forwarded on request via Gigabit Ethernet links and switches to the second-level trigger or to the Event builder. In this paper a discussion of the functionality and real-time properties of the ROS is combined with a presentation of measurement and modelling results for a testbed with a size of about 20% of the final DAQ system. Experimental results on strategies for optimizing the system performance, such as utilization of different network architectures and network transfer protocols, are presented for the testbed, together with extrapolations to the full system. ©2005 IEEE

    Drons col·laboratius

    Get PDF
    La robòtica col·laborativa és senzillament robots dissenyats per dur a terme treballs de col·laboració amb els humans. Els robots col·laboratius o cobots són cada cop més utilitzats a les indústries. La robòtica col·laborativa és un dels àmbits d'actualitat en aquests moments. Però també és un dels més interessants en més d'un sentit. Com es comuniquen dos drons autònoms que col·laboren per fer una tasca? Com són aquests missatges que s'envien? Que poden fer que no podrien fer sols? Aquestes són algunes de les preguntes que ens volem respondre en aquest projecte. En aquest treball es presenta un disseny i implementació de dos drons terrestres que es comuniquen per col·laborar entre ells per resoldre una tasca.Collaborative robotics is simply robots designed to perform collaborative work with humans. Collaborative robots or cobots are increasingly used in industries. Collaborative robotics is one of the current topics now. But it is also one of the most interesting in more ways than one. How do two autonomous drones that collaborate to perform a task communicate? How are these messages sent? What can they do that they could not do alone? These are some of the questions we want to answer in this project. This work presents a design and implementation of two ground drones that communicate to collaborate with each other to solve a task.La robótica colaborativa es sencillamente robots diseñados para llevar a cabo trabajos de colaboración con los humanos. Los robots colaborativos o cobots son cada vez más utilizados en las industrias. La robótica colaborativa es uno de los ámbitos de actualidad. Pero también es uno de los más interesantes en más de un sentido. ¿Cómo se comunican drones autónomos que colaboran para hacer una tarea? ¿Cómo son estos mensajes que es envían? ¿Qué pueden hacer que no lo podrían hacer solos? Estas son algunas de las preguntas que queremos responder con este proyecto. En este trabajo se presenta un diseño e implementación de dos drones terrestres que se comunican para colaborar entre ellos para resolver una tarea
    corecore