Handheld mobile telephone use among Melbourne drivers

Use of handheld mobile phones (\u27mobiles\u27) can impair driving performance, as measured by reaction time and situational awareness, and mobile use is associated with a fourfold increase in crash risk. The current ban on handheld mobile use by drivers in Victoria dates from 1999. In 2005, the Victorian Road Safety Committee made recommendations proposing increased penalties for offences, supported by a subsequent education and enforcement campaign. The government planned to review the infringement penalty ($145 fine and three demerit points against the driver?s licence) towards the end of 2006. The report concludes that the number of drivers at risk from handheld mobile phone use remains almost unchanged. However, a slight reduction in the rate of use overall and variations in use among driver subgroups are apparent. Policing and public awareness campaigns need to further address this preventable risk of injury

Testing water fluxes and storage from two hydrology configurations within the ORCHIDEE land surface model across US semi-arid sites

International audienc

Risk factors for sedation-related events during procedural sedation in the emergency department

Objective: To determine the nature, incidence and risk factors for sedation-related events during ED procedural sedation, with particular focus on the drugs administered

The influence of dilution on the offline measurement of exhaled nitric oxide

© 2018 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine. Objective: Measurement of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) is used to determine the presence and severity of eosinophilic airway inflammation in asthma and other wheezing illnesses. The gold standard of online measurement during a single prolonged exhalation is not suitable for use in young children. The international guidelines for offline measurements recommend collection of exhaled gas in an appropriate reservoir for later analysis in young children. The apparatus required for gas collection, however, creates dead space within the system, which may result in sample dilution and hence inaccuracy. Our objective was to investigate the effect such dilution might have on the accuracy of offline FeNO by comparing the results to online results. Approach: Thirty-five adult subjects without respiratory disease underwent online measurement of FeNO and, thereafter, undertook offline FeNO measurements via exhalation into a collection reservoir using one, five or ten inhalation-exhalation cycles. Fifteen of the subjects also exhaled using the five-breath technique via apparatus with additional dead space. An equation incorporating dead space volume and the number of breaths was used to predict the degree of dilution; the predicted results were compared to the measured results. Main results: The median (IQR) FeNO from a one-breath technique (22 (15-28) ppb was not significantly different to online values (19 (12-27) ppb, p = 1.00), but the results from the five-breath technique (11 (4-19) ppb, p < 0.0001), the ten-breath technique (6 (4-15) ppb, p < 0.0001) and the additional dead space experiment (6 (3-8) ppb, p = 0.0006) were significantly lower than online FeNO. Measured values were consistently significantly different to those predicted by the dilution equation, even when incorporating the exact exhaled volume of gas. Significance: Offline FeNO results may be inaccurate when subjects are unable to fill the collection reservoir with a single exhalation, thus the technique may not be suitable for preschool children

Hydroxymethylation profile of cell-free DNA is a biomarker for early colorectal cancer.

Early detection of cancer will improve survival rates. The blood biomarker 5-hydroxymethylcytosine has been shown to discriminate cancer. In a large covariate-controlled study of over two thousand individual blood samples, we created, tested and explored the properties of a 5-hydroxymethylcytosine-based classifier to detect colorectal cancer (CRC). In an independent validation sample set, the classifier discriminated CRC samples from controls with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 90% (95% CI [87, 93]). Sensitivity was 55% at 95% specificity. Performance was similar for early stage 1 (AUC 89%; 95% CI [83, 94]) and late stage 4 CRC (AUC 94%; 95% CI [89, 98]). The classifier could detect CRC even when the proportion of tumor DNA in blood was undetectable by other methods. Expanding the classifier to include information about cell-free DNA fragment size and abundance across the genome led to gains in sensitivity (63% at 95% specificity), with similar overall performance (AUC 91%; 95% CI [89, 94]). We confirm that 5-hydroxymethylcytosine can be used to detect CRC, even in early-stage disease. Therefore, the inclusion of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in multianalyte testing could improve sensitivity for the detection of early-stage cancer

Metformin in women with type 2 diabetes in pregnancy (MiTy): a multicentre, international, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Although metformin is increasingly being used in women with type 2 diabetes during pregnancy, little data exist on the benefits and harms of metformin use on pregnancy outcomes in these women. We aimed to investigate the effects of the addition of metformin to a standard regimen of insulin on neonatal morbidity and mortality in pregnant women with type 2 diabetes. Methods: In this prospective, multicentre, international, randomised, parallel, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial, women with type 2 diabetes during pregnancy were randomly assigned from 25 centres in Canada and four in Australia to receive either metformin 1000 mg twice daily or placebo, added to insulin. Randomisation was done via a web-based computerised randomisation service and stratified by centre and pre-pregnancy BMI (<30 kg/m2 or ≥30 kg/m2) in a ratio of 1:1 using random block sizes of 4 and 6. Women were eligible if they had type 2 diabetes, were on insulin, had a singleton viable pregnancy, and were between 6 and 22 weeks plus 6 days' gestation. Participants were asked to check their fasting blood glucose level before the first meal of the day, before the last meal of the day, and 2 h after each meal. Insulin doses were adjusted aiming for identical glucose targets (fasting glucose <5·3 mmol/L [95 mg/dL], 2-h postprandial glucose <6·7 mmol/L [120 mg/dL]). Study visits were done monthly and patients were seen every 1–4 weeks as was needed for standard clinical care. At study visits blood pressure and bodyweight were measured; patients were asked about tolerance to their pills, any hospitalisations, insulin doses, and severe hypoglycaemia events; and glucometer readings were downloaded to the central coordinating centre. Participants, caregivers, and outcome assessors were masked to the intervention. The primary outcome was a composite of fetal and neonatal outcomes, for which we calculated the relative risk and 95% CI between groups, stratifying by site and BMI using a log-binomial regression model with an intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included several relevant maternal and neonatal outcomes. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01353391. Findings: Between May 25, 2011, and Oct 11, 2018, we randomly assigned 502 women, 253 (50%) to metformin and 249 (50%) to placebo. Complete data were available for 233 (92%) participants in the metformin group and 240 (96%) in the placebo group for the primary outcome. We found no significant difference in the primary composite neonatal outcome between the two groups (40% vs 40%; p=0·86; relative risk [RR] 1·02 [0·83 to 1·26]). Compared with women in the placebo group, metformin-treated women achieved better glycaemic control (HbA1c at 34 weeks' gestation 41·0 mmol/mol [SD 8·5] vs 43·2 mmol/mol [–10]; 5·90% vs 6·10%; p=0·015; mean glucose 6·05 [0·93] vs 6·27 [0·90]; difference −0·2 [–0·4 to 0·0]), required less insulin (1·1 units per kg per day vs 1·5 units per kg per day; difference −0·4 [95% CI −0·5 to −0·2]; p<0·0001), gained less weight (7·2 kg vs 9·0 kg; difference −1·8 [–2·7 to −0·9]; p<0·0001) and had fewer caesarean births (125 [53%] of 234 in the metformin group vs 148 [63%] of 236 in the placebo group; relative risk [RR] 0·85 [95% CI 0·73 to 0·99]; p=0·031). We found no significant difference between the groups in hypertensive disorders (55 [23%] in the metformin group vs 56 [23%] in the placebo group; p=0·93; RR 0·99 [0·72 to 1·35]). Compared with those in the placebo group, metformin-exposed infants weighed less (mean birthweight 3156 g [SD 742] vs 3375 g [742]; difference −218 [–353 to −82]; p=0·002), fewer were above the 97th centile for birthweight (20 [9%] in the metformin group vs 34 [15%] in the placebo group; RR 0·58 [0·34 to 0·97]; p=0·041), fewer weighed 4000 g or more at birth (28 [12%] in the metformin group vs 44 [19%] in the placebo group; RR 0·65 [0·43 to 0·99]; p=0·046), and metformin-exposed infants had reduced adiposity measures (mean sum of skinfolds 16·0 mm [SD 5·0] vs 17·4 [6·2] mm; difference −1·41 [–2·6 to −0·2]; p=0·024; mean neonatal fat mass 13·2 [SD 6·2] vs 14·6 [5·0]; p=0·017). 30 (13%) infants in the metformin group and 15 (7%) in the placebo group were small for gestational age (RR 1·96 [1·10 to 3·64]; p=0·026). We found no significant difference in the cord c-peptide between groups (673 pmol/L [435] in the metformin group vs 758 pmol/L [595] in the placebo group; p=0·10; ratio of means 0·88 [0·72 to 1·02]). The most common adverse event reported was gastrointestinal (38 events in the metformin group and 38 events in the placebo group). Interpretation: We found several maternal glycaemic and neonatal adiposity benefits in the metformin group. Along with reduced maternal weight gain and insulin dosage and improved glycaemic control, the lower adiposity and infant size measurements resulted in fewer large infants but a higher proportion of small-for-gestational-age infants. Understanding the implications of these effects on infants will be important to properly advise patients who are contemplating the use of metformin during pregnancy.The trial was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada, and the Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada