Effect of progressive mandibular advancement on pharyngeal airway size in anesthetized adults.

BACKGROUND: General anesthesia in adult humans is associated with narrowing or complete closure of the pharyngeal airway. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of progressive mandibular advancement on pharyngeal airway size in normal adults during intravenous infusion of propofol for anesthesia. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging was performed in nine normal adults during wakefulness and during propofol anesthesia. A commercially available intraoral appliance was used to manually advance the mandible. Images were obtained during wakefulness without the appliance and during anesthesia with the participants wearing the appliance under three conditions: without mandibular advancement, advancement to 50% maximum voluntary advancement, and maximum advancement. Using computer software, airway area and maximum anteroposterior and lateral airway diameters were measured on the axial images at the level of the soft palate, uvula, tip of the epiglottis, and base of the epiglottis. RESULTS: Airway area across all four airway levels decreased during anesthesia without mandibular advancement compared with airway area during wakefulness (P \u3c 0.007). Across all levels, airway area at 50% advancement during anesthesia was less than that at centric occlusion during wakefulness (P = 0.06), but airway area with maximum advancement during anesthesia was similar to that during wakefulness (P = 0.64). In general, anteroposterior and lateral airway diameters during anesthesia without mandibular advancement were decreased compared with wakefulness and were restored to their wakefulness values with 50% and/or maximal advancement. CONCLUSIONS: Maximum mandibular advancement during propofol anesthesia is required to restore the pharyngeal airway to its size during wakefulness in normal adults

Metodología activa en el proceso de aprendizaje: estudio realizado con estudiantes del segundo Ciclo, 4º. 5º. Y 6º grado del nivel primario de la Escuela Oficial Rural Mixta del Cantón Llano del Pinal, Quetzaltenango.

Estudio realizado con estudiantes del segundo ciclo del nivel de Educación Primaria, que comprende el cuarto, quinto y sexto grado de la Escuela Oficial Rural Mixta del Cantón Llano del Pinal, Quetzaltenango. El objetivo fue establecer la incidencia de la metodología activa en el proceso de aprendizaje. El enfoque que se utilizó fue cualitativo; mientras que las técnicas fueron la investigación documental e investigación de campo. Se aplicó el método aleatorio, la muestra fue de 102 estudiantes y 31 docentes. Se propone al personal docente un Manual de técnicas y estrategias de metodología activa, para que tengan una guía de aplicación que le permita apropiarse de esa herramienta en forma consciente, de tal forma que su desarrollo no sea producto de la imposición, sino que esté intrínsecamente ligado a la necesidad de participar en la consecución de un verdadero proceso de aprendizaje de los estudiantes

Comprehensive, Evidence-Based, Consensus Guidelines for Prescription of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain from the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP).

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing in the United States is decreasing, however, the opioid epidemic is continuing at an uncontrollable rate. Available data show a significant number of opioid deaths, primarily associated with illicit fentanyl use. It is interesting to also note that the data show no clear correlation between opioid prescribing (either number of prescriptions or morphine milligram equivalent [MME] per capita), opioid hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, the data suggest that the 2016 guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have resulted in notable problems including increased hospitalizations and mental health disorders due to the lack of appropriate opioid prescribing as well as inaptly rapid tapering or weaning processes. Consequently, when examined in light of other policies and complications caused by COVID-19, a fourth wave of the opioid epidemic has been emerging. OBJECTIVES: In light of this, we herein seek to provide guidance for the prescription of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. These clinical practice guidelines are based upon a systematic review of both clinical and epidemiological evidence and have been developed by a panel of multidisciplinary experts assessing the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations and offer a clear explanation of logical relationships between various care options and health outcomes. METHODS: The methods utilized included the development of objectives and key questions for the various facets of opioid prescribing practice. Also utilized were employment of trustworthy standards, and appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest(s). The literature pertaining to opioid use, abuse, effectiveness, and adverse consequences was reviewed. The recommendations were developed after the appropriate review of text and questions by a panel of multidisciplinary subject matter experts, who tabulated comments, incorporated changes, and developed focal responses to questions posed. The multidisciplinary panel finalized 20 guideline recommendations for prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Summary of the results showed over 90% agreement for the final 20 recommendations with strong consensus. The consensus guidelines included 4 sections specific to opioid therapy with 1) ten recommendations particular to initial steps of opioid therapy; 2) five recommendations for assessment of effectiveness of opioid therapy; 3) three recommendations regarding monitoring adherence and side effects; and 4) two general, final phase recommendations. LIMITATIONS: There is a continued paucity of literature of long-term opioid therapy addressing chronic non-cancer pain. Further, significant biases exist in the preparation of guidelines, which has led to highly variable rules and regulations across various states. CONCLUSION: These guidelines were developed based upon a comprehensive review of the literature, consensus among expert panelists, and in alignment with patient preferences, and shared decision-making so as to improve the long-term pain relief and function in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Consequently, it was concluded - and herein recommended - that chronic opioid therapy should be provided in low doses with appropriate adherence monitoring and understanding of adverse events only to those patients with a proven medical necessity, and who exhibit stable improvement in both pain relief and activities of daily function, either independently or in conjunction with other modalities of treatments

Virtual reality entertainment system for treatment of phantom limb pain and methods for making and using same

Visual feedback systems and methods implementing the system are disclosed that use computer generated images of lost limbs to display visual images of the limb being used in activities on a display unit providing visual feedback of the use of the missing limb to the brain to ameliorate, reduce, treat or eliminate phantom limb pain.Board of Regents, University of Texas Syste

Comprehensive, Evidence-Based, Consensus Guidelines for Prescription of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain from the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP).

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing in the United States is decreasing, however, the opioid epidemic is continuing at an uncontrollable rate. Available data show a significant number of opioid deaths, primarily associated with illicit fentanyl use. It is interesting to also note that the data show no clear correlation between opioid prescribing (either number of prescriptions or morphine milligram equivalent [MME] per capita), opioid hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, the data suggest that the 2016 guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have resulted in notable problems including increased hospitalizations and mental health disorders due to the lack of appropriate opioid prescribing as well as inaptly rapid tapering or weaning processes. Consequently, when examined in light of other policies and complications caused by COVID-19, a fourth wave of the opioid epidemic has been emerging. OBJECTIVES: In light of this, we herein seek to provide guidance for the prescription of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. These clinical practice guidelines are based upon a systematic review of both clinical and epidemiological evidence and have been developed by a panel of multidisciplinary experts assessing the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations and offer a clear explanation of logical relationships between various care options and health outcomes. METHODS: The methods utilized included the development of objectives and key questions for the various facets of opioid prescribing practice. Also utilized were employment of trustworthy standards, and appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest(s). The literature pertaining to opioid use, abuse, effectiveness, and adverse consequences was reviewed. The recommendations were developed after the appropriate review of text and questions by a panel of multidisciplinary subject matter experts, who tabulated comments, incorporated changes, and developed focal responses to questions posed. The multidisciplinary panel finalized 20 guideline recommendations for prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Summary of the results showed over 90% agreement for the final 20 recommendations with strong consensus. The consensus guidelines included 4 sections specific to opioid therapy with 1) ten recommendations particular to initial steps of opioid therapy; 2) five recommendations for assessment of effectiveness of opioid therapy; 3) three recommendations regarding monitoring adherence and side effects; and 4) two general, final phase recommendations. LIMITATIONS: There is a continued paucity of literature of long-term opioid therapy addressing chronic non-cancer pain. Further, significant biases exist in the preparation of guidelines, which has led to highly variable rules and regulations across various states. CONCLUSION: These guidelines were developed based upon a comprehensive review of the literature, consensus among expert panelists, and in alignment with patient preferences, and shared decision-making so as to improve the long-term pain relief and function in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Consequently, it was concluded - and herein recommended - that chronic opioid therapy should be provided in low doses with appropriate adherence monitoring and understanding of adverse events only to those patients with a proven medical necessity, and who exhibit stable improvement in both pain relief and activities of daily function, either independently or in conjunction with other modalities of treatments