Fruitfield Recipes

Produced on behalf of Fruitfield Preserves. Recipes for Strawberry Cream Pie, Raspberry Sponge, Apricot Pinwheels, Lemon Curd Souffle, Marmalade Puff, Raspberrty Surprise. Includes Includes two photographs of the Fruitfield Farm at Donabate, Dubln. Please note the date is approximate

A comparative analysis of costs of single and dual rapid HIV and syphilis diagnostics: results from a randomised controlled trial in Colombia.

BACKGROUND: HIV and congenital syphilis are major public health burdens contributing to substantial perinatal morbidity and mortality globally. Although studies have reported on the costs and cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for syphilis screening within antenatal care in a number of resource-constrained settings, empirical evidence on country-specific cost and estimates of single RDTs compared with dual RDTs for HIV and syphilis are limited. METHODS: A cluster randomised controlled study design was used to compare the incremental costs of two testing algorithms: (1) single RDTs for HIV and syphilis and (2) dual RDTs for HIV and syphilis, in 12 health facilities in Bogota and Cali, Colombia. The costs of single HIV and syphilis RDTs and dual HIV and syphilis RDTs were collected from each of the health facilities. The economic costs per woman tested for HIV and syphilis and costs per woman treated for syphilis defined as the total costs required to test and treat one woman for syphilis were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 2214 women were tested in the study facilities. Cost per pregnant woman tested and cost per woman treated for syphilis were US$10.26 and US$607.99, respectively in the single RDT arm. For the dual RDTs, the cost per pregnant woman tested for HIV and syphilis and cost per woman treated for syphilis were US$15.89 and US$1859.26, respectively. Overall costs per woman tested for HIV and syphilis and cost per woman treated for syphilis were lower in Cali compared with Bogota across both intervention arms. Staff costs accounted for the largest proportion of costs while treatment costs comprised <1% of the preventive programme. CONCLUSIONS: Findings show lower average costs for single RDTs compared with dual RDTs with costs sensitive to personnel costs and the scale of output at the health facilities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02454816; results

Monitoring Virologic Responses to Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-Infected Adults in Kenya: Evaluation of a Low-Cost Viral Load Assay

A key advantage of monitoring HIV viral load (VL) in persons receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) is the ability to detect virologic failure before clinical deterioration or resistance occurs. Detection of virologic failure will help clarify the need for enhanced adherence counseling or a change to second- line therapy. Low-cost, locally performable alternates to expensive VL assays are needed where resources are limited.We monitored the response to 48-week ART in 100 treatment-naïve Kenyan adults using a low-cost VL measurement, the Cavidi reverse transcriptase (RT) assay and gold-standard assays, Roche RNA PCR and Bayer Versant HIV-1 RNA (bDNA) assays. In Altman-Bland plots, the mean difference in viral loads between the three assays was small (<0.5 log(10) copies/mL). However, the limits of agreement between the methods exceeded the biologically relevant change of 0.5 log copies/ml. Therefore, the RT assay cannot be used interchangeably with the other assays to monitor individual patients. The RT assay was 100% sensitive in detecting viral loads of > or =400 copies/ml compared to gold-standard assays. After 24 weeks of treatment, viral load measured by the RT assay was undetectable in 95% of 65 patients with undetectable RNA PCR VL (<400 copies/ml), 90% of 67 patients with undetectable bDNA VL, and 96% of 57 patients with undetectable VL in both RNA PCR and bDNA assays. The negative predictive value of the RT assay was 100% compared to either assay; the positive predictive value was 86% compared to RNA PCR and 70% compared to bDNA.The RT assay compared well with gold standard assays. Our study highlights the importance of not interchanging viral load assays when monitoring an individual patient. Furthermore, the RT assay may be limited by low positive predictive values when used in populations with low prevalence of virologic failure

Kind Cooking

Published by The Kerryman for Maura Laverty Miscellanies c.1955. With a section on diet by Sybil Le Brocquy, decorations by Louis Le Brocquy. 133p., ill., 22cm.https://arrow.tudublin.ie/irckbooks/1021/thumbnail.jp

The Artist Behind the Winter Dance Logo: Smoker Marchand

The Rangelands archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information.Migrated from OJS platform March 2020Legacy DOIs that must be preserved: 10.2458/azu_rangelands_v33i5_krame

Characteristics of the Cavidi^® reverse transcriptase assay for detecting HIV viral loads ≥400 copies/mL using RNA PCR or branched DNA assay (bDNA) assays in patients receiving antiretroviral therapy.

a<p>95% CI, 95% Confidence Interval.</p>b<p>Sensitivity of the RT assay was the proportion of patients at baseline with RT assays ≥400 eq copies/ml among those with viral loads ≥400 copies/ml using RNA PCR or bDNA assays. Specificity of the RT assay was the proportion of patients at week 36 or 48 of treatment (which ever was the last value) with undetectable RT activity among those with viral loads <400 copies/ml using RNA PCR or bDNA assays. bDNA data from nine patients were excluded due to technical errors in one run.</p>c<p>Positive and negative predictive values were calculated using a 22% prevalence (18 of 83 patients with RNA PCR available after week 24) of a detectable RNA PCR viral load at week 36 or 48 of therapy; a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 95% for the RNA PCR assay and a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 90% for the bDNA assay.</p

The proportion of patients with a detectable viral load (≥400 copies/ml) at study visits using three viral load assays (Cavidi reverse transcriptase (RT) assay, Roche RNA PCR, and branched DNA assay [bDNA]).

<p>The proportion of patients with a detectable viral load (≥400 copies/ml) at study visits using three viral load assays (Cavidi reverse transcriptase (RT) assay, Roche RNA PCR, and branched DNA assay [bDNA]).</p