Hand washing with soap and water together with behavioural recommendations prevents infections in common work environment: an open cluster-randomized trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hand hygiene is considered as an important means of infection control. We explored whether guided hand hygiene together with transmission-limiting behaviour reduces infection episodes and lost days of work in a common work environment in an open cluster-randomized 3-arm intervention trial.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A total of 21 clusters (683 persons) were randomized to implement hand hygiene with soap and water (257 persons), with alcohol-based hand rub (202 persons), or to serve as a control (224 persons). Participants in both intervention arms also received standardized instructions on how to limit the transmission of infections. The intervention period (16 months) included the emergence of the 2009 influenza pandemic and the subsequent national hand hygiene campaign influencing also the control arm.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In the total follow-up period there was a 6.7% reduction of infection episodes in the soap-and water arm (p = 0.04). Before the onset of the anti-pandemic campaign, a statistically significant (p = 0.002) difference in the mean occurrence of infection episodes was observed between the control (6.0 per year) and the soap-and-water arm (5.0 per year) but not between the control and the alcohol-rub arm (5.6 per year). Neither intervention had a decreasing effect on absence from work.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We conclude that intensified hand hygiene using water and soap together with behavioural recommendations can reduce the occurrence of self-reported acute illnesses in common work environment. Surprisingly, the occurrence of reported sick leaves also increased in the soap-and water-arm.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00981877">NCT00981877</a></p> <p>Source of funding</p> <p>The Finnish Work Environment Fund and the National Institute for Health and Welfare.</p

Dynamics of a Quantum Phase Transition and Relaxation to a Steady State

We review recent theoretical work on two closely related issues: excitation of an isolated quantum condensed matter system driven adiabatically across a continuous quantum phase transition or a gapless phase, and apparent relaxation of an excited system after a sudden quench of a parameter in its Hamiltonian. Accordingly the review is divided into two parts. The first part revolves around a quantum version of the Kibble-Zurek mechanism including also phenomena that go beyond this simple paradigm. What they have in common is that excitation of a gapless many-body system scales with a power of the driving rate. The second part attempts a systematic presentation of recent results and conjectures on apparent relaxation of a pure state of an isolated quantum many-body system after its excitation by a sudden quench. This research is motivated in part by recent experimental developments in the physics of ultracold atoms with potential applications in the adiabatic quantum state preparation and quantum computation.Comment: 117 pages; review accepted in Advances in Physic

The A-B transition in superfluid helium-3 under confinement in a thin slab geometry

The influence of confinement on the topological phases of superfluid 3He is studied using the torsional pendulum method. We focus on the phase transition between the chiral A-phase and the time-reversal-invariant B-phase, motivated by the prediction of a spatiallymodulated (stripe) phase at the A-B phase boundary. We confine superfluid 3He to a single 1.08 {\mu}m thick nanofluidic cavity incorporated into a high-precision torsion pendulum, and map the phase diagram between 0.1 and 5.6 bar. We observe only small supercooling of the A-phase, in comparison to bulk or when confined in aerogel. This has a non-monotonic pressure dependence, suggesting that a new intrinsic B-phase nucleation mechanism operates under confinement, mediated by the putative stripe phase. Both the phase diagram and the relative superfluid fraction of the A and B phases, show that strong coupling is present at all pressures, with implications for the stability of the stripe phase.Comment: 6 figures, 1 table + supplemental informatio

Acute graft versus host disease

Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) occurs after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant and is a reaction of donor immune cells against host tissues. Activated donor T cells damage host epithelial cells after an inflammatory cascade that begins with the preparative regimen. About 35%–50% of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients will develop acute GVHD. The exact risk is dependent on the stem cell source, age of the patient, conditioning, and GVHD prophylaxis used. Given the number of transplants performed, we can expect about 5500 patients/year to develop acute GVHD. Patients can have involvement of three organs: skin (rash/dermatitis), liver (hepatitis/jaundice), and gastrointestinal tract (abdominal pain/diarrhea). One or more organs may be involved. GVHD is a clinical diagnosis that may be supported with appropriate biopsies. The reason to pursue a tissue biopsy is to help differentiate from other diagnoses which may mimic GVHD, such as viral infection (hepatitis, colitis) or drug reaction (causing skin rash). Acute GVHD is staged and graded (grade 0-IV) by the number and extent of organ involvement. Patients with grade III/IV acute GVHD tend to have a poor outcome. Generally the patient is treated by optimizing their immunosuppression and adding methylprednisolone. About 50% of patients will have a solid response to methylprednisolone. If patients progress after 3 days or are not improved after 7 days, they will get salvage (second-line) immunosuppressive therapy for which there is currently no standard-of-care. Well-organized clinical trials are imperative to better define second-line therapies for this disease. Additional management issues are attention to wound infections in skin GVHD and fluid/nutrition management in gastrointestinal GVHD. About 50% of patients with acute GVHD will eventually have manifestations of chronic GVHD