Chapter 19 Noise pollution and its impact on human health and the environment

This chapter deals with (1) the basic theory of sound propagation; (2) an overview of noise pollution problem in view of policy and standards by the World Health Organization, the United States, and the European Union; (3) noise exposure sources from aircraft, road traffic and railways, in-vehicle, work, and construction sites, and occupations, and households; (4) the noise pollution impact on human health and the biological environment; (5) modeling of regional noise-affected habitats in protected and unprotected land areas and the marine environment; (6) noise control measures and sustainability in view of sustainable building design, noise mapping, and control measures such as barriers and berms along roadsides, acoustic building materials, roadway vehicle noise source control, road surface, and pavement materials; and (7) environmental noise pollution management measures and their impact on human health

Signals in the Soil: An Introduction to Wireless Underground Communications

In this chapter, wireless underground (UG) communications are introduced. A detailed overview of WUC is given. A comprehensive review of research challenges in WUC is presented. The evolution of underground wireless is also discussed. Moreover, different component of UG communications is wireless. The WUC system architecture is explained with a detailed discussion of the anatomy of an underground mote. The examples of UG wireless communication systems are explored. Furthermore, the differences of UG wireless and over-the-air wireless are debated. Different types of wireless underground channel (e.g., In-Soil, Soil-to-Air, and Air-to-Soil) are reported as well

Nivel de conocimientos de estudiantes de medicina sobre diagnóstico y manejo del infarto agudo del miocardio

Introduction: acute myocardial infarction is a disease with high morbidity and mortality.Objective: to determine the knowledge level of medical students about the diagnosis and management of acute myocardial infarction.Method: an observational, descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out between January and February 2022 in medical students from the University of Medical Sciences of Pinar del Río who participated in the provincial update workshop on acute myocardial infarction. Through intentional sampling, a sample of 92 students was selected. To collect the information, a survey was used using Google Forms.Results: the female sex (65,21%), the age group from 21 to 22 years (65,21%) and the fourth-year students (50%) prevailed. Hypertension was the most identified risk factor (97,98%). 97,82% of the students identified precordial pain as the main clinical manifestation. 100% identified the presentation with complications, where sudden death was the most identified (81,52%). 100% point to the electrocardiogram as the main complementary, where ST alterations were the most identified (84,78%). 95,65% of the students indicated constant monitoring of vital parameters and cardiovascular function as the management measure.Conclusions: Medicine students belonging to the clinical area at the University of Medical Sciences of Pinar del Río have an adequate level of knowledge about the diagnosis and management of acute myocardial infarction.Introducción: el infarto agudo del miocardio constituye una enfermedad con elevada morbilidad y mortalidad.Objetivo: determinar el nivel de conocimientos de estudiantes de medicina sobre el diagnóstico y manejo del infarto agudo del miocardioMétodo: se realizó un estudio observacional, descriptivo y transversal entre enero y febrero de 2022 en estudiantes de Medicina de la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de Pinar del Río del ciclo clínico que participaron en el Taller provincial de actualización sobre infarto agudo de miocardio. Mediante un muestreo intencional se seleccionó una muestra de 92 estudiantes. Para la recolección de la información se empleó una encuesta mediante Google Forms.Resultados: predominó el sexo femenino (65,21 %), el grupo etario de 21 a 22 años (65,21 %) y los estudiantes de cuarto año (50 %). La hipertensión fue el factor de riesgo más identificado (97,98 %). El 97,82 % de los estudiantes identificó el dolor precordial como principal manifestación clínica. El 100 % identificó la presentación con complicaciones, donde la muerte súbita fue la más identificada (81,52 %). El 100 % señala al electrocardiograma como principal complementario, donde las alteraciones del ST fueron las más identificada (84,78 %). El 95,65 % de los estudiantes indicaron la monitorización constante de los parámetros vitales y función cardiovascular como la medida de manejo.Conclusiones: los estudiantes de Medicina pertenecientes al área clínica en la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de Pinar del Río poseen un adecuado nivel de conocimientos sobre el diagnóstico y manejo del infarto agudo del miocardio.  

Non-invasive diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection has been implicated in a number of malignancies and non-malignant conditions including peptic ulcers, non-ulcer dyspepsia, recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding, unexplained iron deficiency anaemia, idiopathic thrombocytopaenia purpura, and colorectal adenomas. The confirmatory diagnosis of H pylori is by endoscopic biopsy, followed by histopathological examination using haemotoxylin and eosin (H & E) stain or special stains such as Giemsa stain and Warthin-Starry stain. Special stains are more accurate than H & E stain. There is significant uncertainty about the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive tests for diagnosis of H pylori. OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of urea breath test, serology, and stool antigen test, used alone or in combination, for diagnosis of H pylori infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic people, so that eradication therapy for H pylori can be started. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Science Citation Index and the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Database on 4 March 2016. We screened references in the included studies to identify additional studies. We also conducted citation searches of relevant studies, most recently on 4 December 2016. We did not restrict studies by language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated at least one of the index tests (urea breath test using isotopes such as13C or14C, serology and stool antigen test) against the reference standard (histopathological examination using H & E stain, special stains or immunohistochemical stain) in people suspected of having H pylori infection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the references to identify relevant studies and independently extracted data. We assessed the methodological quality of studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed meta-analysis by using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model to estimate and compare SROC curves. Where appropriate, we used bivariate or univariate logistic regression models to estimate summary sensitivities and specificities. MAIN RESULTS: We included 101 studies involving 11,003 participants, of which 5839 participants (53.1%) had H pylori infection. The prevalence of H pylori infection in the studies ranged from 15.2% to 94.7%, with a median prevalence of 53.7% (interquartile range 42.0% to 66.5%). Most of the studies (57%) included participants with dyspepsia and 53 studies excluded participants who recently had proton pump inhibitors or antibiotics.There was at least an unclear risk of bias or unclear applicability concern for each study.Of the 101 studies, 15 compared the accuracy of two index tests and two studies compared the accuracy of three index tests. Thirty-four studies (4242 participants) evaluated serology; 29 studies (2988 participants) evaluated stool antigen test; 34 studies (3139 participants) evaluated urea breath test-13C; 21 studies (1810 participants) evaluated urea breath test-14C; and two studies (127 participants) evaluated urea breath test but did not report the isotope used. The thresholds used to define test positivity and the staining techniques used for histopathological examination (reference standard) varied between studies. Due to sparse data for each threshold reported, it was not possible to identify the best threshold for each test.Using data from 99 studies in an indirect test comparison, there was statistical evidence of a difference in diagnostic accuracy between urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology and stool antigen test (P = 0.024). The diagnostic odds ratios for urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology, and stool antigen test were 153 (95% confidence interval (CI) 73.7 to 316), 105 (95% CI 74.0 to 150), 47.4 (95% CI 25.5 to 88.1) and 45.1 (95% CI 24.2 to 84.1). The sensitivity (95% CI) estimated at a fixed specificity of 0.90 (median from studies across the four tests), was 0.94 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.97) for urea breath test-13C, 0.92 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.94) for urea breath test-14C, 0.84 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.91) for serology, and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.90) for stool antigen test. This implies that on average, given a specificity of 0.90 and prevalence of 53.7% (median specificity and prevalence in the studies), out of 1000 people tested for H pylori infection, there will be 46 false positives (people without H pylori infection who will be diagnosed as having H pylori infection). In this hypothetical cohort, urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology, and stool antigen test will give 30 (95% CI 15 to 58), 42 (95% CI 30 to 58), 86 (95% CI 50 to 140), and 89 (95% CI 52 to 146) false negatives respectively (people with H pylori infection for whom the diagnosis of H pylori will be missed).Direct comparisons were based on few head-to-head studies. The ratios of diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) were 0.68 (95% CI 0.12 to 3.70; P = 0.56) for urea breath test-13C versus serology (seven studies), and 0.88 (95% CI 0.14 to 5.56; P = 0.84) for urea breath test-13C versus stool antigen test (seven studies). The 95% CIs of these estimates overlap with those of the ratios of DORs from the indirect comparison. Data were limited or unavailable for meta-analysis of other direct comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In people without a history of gastrectomy and those who have not recently had antibiotics or proton ,pump inhibitors, urea breath tests had high diagnostic accuracy while serology and stool antigen tests were less accurate for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.This is based on an indirect test comparison (with potential for bias due to confounding), as evidence from direct comparisons was limited or unavailable. The thresholds used for these tests were highly variable and we were unable to identify specific thresholds that might be useful in clinical practice.We need further comparative studies of high methodological quality to obtain more reliable evidence of relative accuracy between the tests. Such studies should be conducted prospectively in a representative spectrum of participants and clearly reported to ensure low risk of bias. Most importantly, studies should prespecify and clearly report thresholds used, and should avoid inappropriate exclusions