5 research outputs found

    Perfil audiométrico de trabalhadores do distrito industrial de Maracanaú - CE Audiometric profile of Maracanaú's industrial district workers

    No full text
    OBJETIVO: Estabelecer o perfil audiométrico de trabalhadores expostos ao ruído, acima do nível de ação (85 dB), em empresas do Distrito Industrial de Maracanaú, Ceará. MÉTODOS: Foi realizado um estudo descritivo de prevalência a partir da avaliação de dados de exames audiométricos, coletados de arquivos das empresas pesquisadas realizados no período de abril a outubro de 2006. Foram avaliados 5372 trabalhadores das 47 (52,80%) empresas que autorizaram a pesquisa e as variáveis analisadas foram: faixa etária, tempo total de exposição ao ruído, estado da acuidade auditiva, tipo de perda auditiva, lateralidade da perda auditiva e configuração audiométrica sugestiva de perda auditiva induzida por ruído nos trabalhadores e setor da atividade econômica e porte da empresa. RESULTADOS: Constatou-se que 19,00% da população estudada apresentaram alteração, predominando a perda auditiva sensório neural em 90,67% dos casos. Em 12,71% da população estudada observou-se quadro sugestivo de perda auditiva induzida por ruído (PAIR) e, em 71,77% da população portadora de perda auditiva sensório neural, há indícios de PAIR. Em relação à lateralidade da perda, 39,09% é unilateral, sendo 24,03% unilateral esquerda. CONCLUSÕES: Apesar dos resultados não representarem a prevalência total de perdas auditivas do Distrito, eles apontam para a necessidade não apenas de realização de audiometrias ocupacionais pontuais, mas também de monitoramento da audição dos trabalhadores de forma longitudinal, como parte de um programa de conservação auditiva.<br>PURPOSE: To establish the audiometric profile of workers exposed to noise above the action level (85 dB) in Maracanaú's Industrial District, Ceará (Brazil). METHODS: A descriptive study of prevalence was carried out through the evaluation of audiometric data gathered from the files of the researched companies between April and October of 2006. There were 5372 workers evaluated, from the 47 (52,80%) companies that authorized the study. The studied variables were: age range, total period of exposition to noise, auditory acuity status, type of hearing loss, hearing loss laterality and audiometric configuration suggestive of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in workers, economic activity trade and size of the company. RESULTS: It was observed that 19% of the studied population presented alterations, with predominance of sensory neural hearing loss (SNHL) in 90.67% of the cases. In 12.71% of the population suggestive signs of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) were observed, and in 71.77% of the population with SNHL there were signs of NIHL. Regarding laterality of the hearing loss, 39.09% was unilateral, from which 24.03% was on the left ear. CONCLUSION: Although the results do not represent the total prevalence of hearing loss in the District, they point out to the necessity not only to perform occupational audiometry, but also to longitudinally monitor the hearing of these workers as part of a hearing conservation program

    Effect of flexible family visitation on delirium among patients in the Intensive Care Unit: the ICU visits randomized clinical trial

    No full text
    Fernando Augusto Bozza. Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Documento produzido em parceria ou por autor vinculado à Fiocruz, mas não consta a informação no documento.Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Moinhos de Vento (HMV), Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Rosa, D. B. da Silva, Eugênio, Haack, Medeiros, Tonietto, Teixeira); Research Projects Office, HMV, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Rosa, Falavigna, D. B. da Silva, Sganzerla, Santos, Kochhann, de Moura, Eugênio, Haack, Barbosa, Robinson, Schneider, de Oliveira, Jeffman, Medeiros, Hammes); Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network (BRICNet), São Paulo, São Paulo (Rosa, Cavalcanti, Machado, Azevedo, Salluh, Nobre, Bozza, Teixeira); HCor Research Institute, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (Cavalcanti); Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Intensive Care, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (Machado); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (Azevedo); Department of Critical Care, Instituto D’Or de Pesquisa e Ensino, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Salluh, Mesquita, Bozza); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Pellegrini, Moraes); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Foernges); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Santa Rita, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Torelly); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Universitário do Oeste do Paraná, Cascavel, Paraná, Brazil (Ayres, Duarte); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital do Câncer de Cascavel, Cascavel, Paraná, Brazil (Duarte); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil (Lovato); Intensive Care Unit, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Feira de Santana, Feira de Santana, Bahia, Brazil (Sampaio); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Geral Clériston Andrade, Feira de Santana, Bahia, Brazil (de Oliveira Júnior); Intensive Care Unit, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de São João Del Rei, São João Del Rei, Minas Gerais, Brazil (Paranhos); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Regional Doutor Deoclécio Marques de Lucena, Parnamirim, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil (Dantas, de Brito); Intensive Care Unit, Fundação Hospital Adriano Jorge, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil (Paulo); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Agamenon Magalhães, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil (Gallindo); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital da Cidade, Passo Fundo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Pilau); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Mãe de Deus, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Valentim); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital de Urgências de Goiânia, Goiânia, Goiânia, Brazil (Meira Teles); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital das Clínicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil (Nobre); Intensive Care Unit, Pavilhão Pereira Filho, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Birriel); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Regional do Baixo Amazonas, Santarém, Pará, Brazil (Corrêa e Castro); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Nossa Senhora da Conceição, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Specht); School of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (N. B. da Silva); Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (Korte); Unit of Pediatric Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Ospedale dei Bambini—ASST Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy (Giannini); Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Bozza).Submitted by Janaína Nascimento ([email protected]) on 2019-09-11T14:37:38Z No. of bitstreams: 1 ve_Rosa_Regis_etal_INI_2019.pdf: 616825 bytes, checksum: 2aae5be305137324e272a08cc32e9270 (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Janaína Nascimento ([email protected]) on 2019-09-11T14:52:11Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 ve_Rosa_Regis_etal_INI_2019.pdf: 616825 bytes, checksum: 2aae5be305137324e272a08cc32e9270 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2019-09-11T14:52:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ve_Rosa_Regis_etal_INI_2019.pdf: 616825 bytes, checksum: 2aae5be305137324e272a08cc32e9270 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019Múltipla - Ver em Notas.IMPORTANCE: The effects of intensive care unit (ICU) visiting hours remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a flexible family visitation policy in the ICU reduces the incidence of delirium. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Cluster-crossover randomized clinical trial involving patients, family members, and clinicians from 36 adult ICUs with restricted visiting hours (<4.5 hours per day) in Brazil. Participants were recruited from April 2017 to June 2018, with follow-up until July 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Flexible visitation (up to 12 hours per day) supported by family education (n = 837 patients, 652 family members, and 435 clinicians) or usual restricted visitation (median, 1.5 hours per day; n = 848 patients, 643 family members, and 391 clinicians). Nineteen ICUs started with flexible visitation, and 17 started with restricted visitation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was incidence of delirium during ICU stay, assessed using the CAM-ICU. Secondary outcomes included ICU-acquired infections for patients; symptoms of anxiety and depression assessed using the HADS (range, 0 [best] to 21 [worst]) for family members; and burnout for ICU staff (Maslach Burnout Inventory). RESULTS: Among 1685 patients, 1295 family members, and 826 clinicians enrolled, 1685 patients (100%) (mean age, 58.5 years; 47.2% women), 1060 family members (81.8%) (mean age, 45.2 years; 70.3% women), and 737 clinicians (89.2%) (mean age, 35.5 years; 72.9% women) completed the trial. The mean daily duration of visits was significantly higher with flexible visitation (4.8 vs 1.4 hours; adjusted difference, 3.4 hours [95% CI, 2.8 to 3.9]; P < .001). The incidence of delirium during ICU stay was not significantly different between flexible and restricted visitation (18.9% vs 20.1%; adjusted difference, −1.7% [95% CI, −6.1% to 2.7%]; P = .44). Among 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 did not differ significantly between flexible and restricted visitation, including ICU-acquired infections (3.7% vs 4.5%; adjusted difference, −0.8% [95% CI, −2.1% to 1.0%]; P = .38) and staff burnout (22.0% vs 24.8%; adjusted difference, −3.8% [95% CI, −4.8% to 12.5%]; P = .36). For family members, median anxiety (6.0 vs 7.0; adjusted difference, −1.6 [95% CI, −2.3 to −0.9]; P < .001) and depression scores (4.0 vs 5.0; adjusted difference, −1.2 [95% CI, −2.0 to −0.4]; P = .003) were significantly better with flexible visitation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients in the ICU, a flexible family visitation policy, vs standard restricted visiting hours, did not significantly reduce the incidence of delirium

    A mulher na sociedade de classes: um clássico dos estudos de gênero

    No full text

    Effect of Flexible Family Visitation on Delirium Among Patients in the Intensive Care Unit

    No full text

    Brazilian Flora 2020: Leveraging the power of a collaborative scientific network

    No full text
    International audienceThe shortage of reliable primary taxonomic data limits the description of biological taxa and the understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes, complicating biogeographical, ecological, and evolutionary studies. This deficit creates a significant taxonomic impediment to biodiversity research and conservation planning. The taxonomic impediment and the biodiversity crisis are widely recognized, highlighting the urgent need for reliable taxonomic data. Over the past decade, numerous countries worldwide have devoted considerable effort to Target 1 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC), which called for the preparation of a working list of all known plant species by 2010 and an online world Flora by 2020. Brazil is a megadiverse country, home to more of the world's known plant species than any other country. Despite that, Flora Brasiliensis, concluded in 1906, was the last comprehensive treatment of the Brazilian flora. The lack of accurate estimates of the number of species of algae, fungi, and plants occurring in Brazil contributes to the prevailing taxonomic impediment and delays progress towards the GSPC targets. Over the past 12 years, a legion of taxonomists motivated to meet Target 1 of the GSPC, worked together to gather and integrate knowledge on the algal, plant, and fungal diversity of Brazil. Overall, a team of about 980 taxonomists joined efforts in a highly collaborative project that used cybertaxonomy to prepare an updated Flora of Brazil, showing the power of scientific collaboration to reach ambitious goals. This paper presents an overview of the Brazilian Flora 2020 and provides taxonomic and spatial updates on the algae, fungi, and plants found in one of the world's most biodiverse countries. We further identify collection gaps and summarize future goals that extend beyond 2020. Our results show that Brazil is home to 46,975 native species of algae, fungi, and plants, of which 19,669 are endemic to the country. The data compiled to date suggests that the Atlantic Rainforest might be the most diverse Brazilian domain for all plant groups except gymnosperms, which are most diverse in the Amazon. However, scientific knowledge of Brazilian diversity is still unequally distributed, with the Atlantic Rainforest and the Cerrado being the most intensively sampled and studied biomes in the country. In times of “scientific reductionism”, with botanical and mycological sciences suffering pervasive depreciation in recent decades, the first online Flora of Brazil 2020 significantly enhanced the quality and quantity of taxonomic data available for algae, fungi, and plants from Brazil. This project also made all the information freely available online, providing a firm foundation for future research and for the management, conservation, and sustainable use of the Brazilian funga and flora
    corecore