55 research outputs found

    Political Capitalism: The Interaction between Income Inequality, Economic Freedom and Democracy

    Full text link
    In this contribution we study the relationship between income inequality and economic freedom for a panel of 100 countries for the 1971-2010 period. From a panel causality study we find that income inequality has a negative causal effect on economic freedom, while causation does not run in the opposite direction. We argue that the negative effect of inequality on economic liberty is due to the elite’s political power stemming from its disproportionate control over a country’s economic resources. The elite uses this power to curtail economic freedom to defend its economic interests by discouraging innovation, competition and protecting its rents. Running a series of dynamic panel estimations, we show that the negative effect of income inequality on economic freedom is robust to different sets of controls and estimation techniques. Finally, we show that the dynamics of the inequality-freedom nexus are to some extent conditional upon a country’s political regime. When inequality is low, democracies enjoy comparatively higher levels of economic liberty, in line with the interests of a large middle-class. By contrast, economic freedom is lower in democracies (compared to strongly autocratic regimes with the same income distribution) when inequality is high. We argue that the latter finding corresponds to a system of political capitalism or captured democracy, where a powerful economic elite cooperates with politicians and bureaucrats for their mutual benefit

    Environmentalism in the EU-28 context: the impact of governance quality on environmental energy efficiency

    Get PDF
    Environmental policies are a significant cornerstone of a developed economy, but the question that arises is whether such policies lead to a sustainable growth path. It is clear that the energy sector plays a pivotal role in environmental policies, and although the current literature has focused on examining the link between energy consumption and economic growth through an abundance of studies, it does not explicitly consider the role of institutional or governance quality variables in the process. Both globalization and democracy are important drivers of sustainability, while environmentalism is essential for the objective of gaining a β€œbetter world.” Governance quality is expected to be the key, not only for economic purposes but also for the efficiency of environmental policies. To that end, the analysis in this paper explores the link between governance quality and energy efficiency for the EU-28 countries, spanning the period 1995 to 2014. The findings document that there is a nexus between energy efficiency and income they move together: the most efficient countries are in the group with higher GDP per capita. Furthermore, the results show that governance quality is an important driver of energy efficiency and, hence, of environmental policies.University of Granad

    Mechanisms Underlaying Regulation of Synaptic Transmission in Hippocampus by Hydrogen Peroxide

    Full text link
    Latest findings provided evidences of the important role of reactive oxygen species in cellular signal processes. In this study we examined the action of hydrogen peroxide on synaptic transmission in the hippocampus. Millimolar concentrations of hydrogen peroxide decreased fEPSP amplitude evoked in the CA1 region of rat hippocampal slices. GABAA receptors antagonist picrotoxin, ryanodine receptors antagonist dantrolene, ATP-sensitive potassium channels antagonist tolbutamide had no influence on the inhibitory effect of hydrogen peroxide whereas non-specific adenosine receptors antagonist caffeine blocked fEPSP depression by hydrogen peroxide, indicating that synaptic transmission inhibition involved adenosine receptors activation. Pretreatment of slices with hydrogen peroxide before the addition of adenosine had no effect on the fEPSP depression caused by adenosine suggesting that functional properties of adenosine receptors are not affected by hydrogen peroxide

    Mechanisms Underlaying Regulation of Synaptic Transmission in Hippocampus by Hydrogen Peroxide

    Full text link
    Latest findings provided evidences of the important role of reactive oxygen species in cellular signal processes. In this study we examined the action of hydrogen peroxide on synaptic transmission in the hippocampus. Millimolar concentrations of hydrogen peroxide decreased fEPSP amplitude evoked in the CA1 region of rat hippocampal slices. GABAA receptors antagonist picrotoxin, ryanodine receptors antagonist dantrolene, ATP-sensitive potassium channels antagonist tolbutamide had no influence on the inhibitory effect of hydrogen peroxide whereas non-specific adenosine receptors antagonist caffeine blocked fEPSP depression by hydrogen peroxide, indicating that synaptic transmission inhibition involved adenosine receptors activation. Pretreatment of slices with hydrogen peroxide before the addition of adenosine had no effect on the fEPSP depression caused by adenosine suggesting that functional properties of adenosine receptors are not affected by hydrogen peroxide

    Multichannel system for recording of neuronal electrical activity in vitro

    Full text link
    ΠœΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹ ΠΈ Π°ΠΏΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΡƒΡ€Π° для Π½Π°ΡƒΡ‡Π½Ρ‹Ρ… исслСдовани

    Blood invasiveness of Salmonella enterica

    Full text link

    Patterns of electrical activity generated by biological neural network in vitro

    Get PDF
    Cultured dissociated neurons forming network in vitro is a unique system representing living biological neural net- work developing in fully artificial conditions. This is a promising model for study of basic mechanisms of the brain functioning that requires special tools for interfacing and investigations. We have developed a set of devices and techniques for culturing of neural network on the surface of microelectrode sensor and registered specific patterns of electrical activity of the living neural network in vitro

    Діагностична Ρ–Π½Ρ„ΠΎΡ€ΠΌΠ°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ–ΡΡ‚ΡŒ ΠΊΠ»Ρ–Π½Ρ–Ρ‡Π½ΠΈΡ… ΠΌΠ°Ρ€ΠΊΠ΅Ρ€Ρ–Π² Ρƒ Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΡ„Ρ–ΠΊΠ°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ— гострих Ρ–Π½Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ†Ρ–ΠΉΠ½ΠΎ-Π·Π°ΠΏΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΈΡ… процСсів Π½ΠΈΠΆΠ½Ρ–Ρ… Π΄ΠΈΡ…Π°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΈΡ… ΡˆΠ»ΡΡ…Ρ–Π² Ρƒ Π΄Ρ–Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ

    Full text link
    Objective.Β To study the clinical features of the course of community-acquired pneumonia and acute obstructive bronchitis in children of different ages in order to optimize the treatment of the acute pathology of the respiratory system.Materials and methods. А cohort of patients with acute respiratory pathology of children with different ages (75 patients) who received inpatient treatment has been formed by the method of simple random sampling. The first (I) clinical group was formed by 51 patients with a verified diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia, acute course, and the second (II) clinical group included 24 children, in which the infiltrative acute process in the lungs was excluded, that is, with manifestations of broncho-obstructive syndrome (BOS). According to the main clinical characteristics, the comparison groups have been comparable. The results of the study have been analyzed by parametric and non-parametric calculation methods, and the evaluation of the diagnostic value of the tests has been performed taking into account their sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) from the perspective of clinical epidemiology.Results.Β The analysis of the main symptoms and signs that troubled the hospitalized patients has showed that the most frequent complaints in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) were cough (100%), fever (84,3%) and signs of intoxication (90.2%), which only in every second child (45.1%) were combined with shortness of breath. At the same time, the leading combination of complaints in children with BOS were cough (100% of cases) and dyspnea (83.3% of observations), but often in combination with symptoms of intoxication (70.8% of people) and hyperthermia (in 66.7% of children). The analysis of auscultative changes above the pulmonary fields has showed the asymmetry of auscultative phenomena in majority (90.3% of children) of patients with CAP and in 16.7% of cases in the II group of (P<0,001). At the same time, the persistence of asymmetrycal auscultatory changes in the dynamics of observation for >2 days has been observed in 90.2% of cases in I group and only in 12.5% patients with BOS (P<0,001). There has been recorded the following auscultational symptoms in patients with BOS: weakened breathing diminished breath sounds above both pulmonary fields in every fifth (20.8%) patient, the presence of bilateral (without asymmetricity) crepitation/fine bubbling rales β€” in 12.5% of subjects. Whistling dry rales without there specific localization have been heard in all patients with BOS but in half (52.9%) patients with pneumonia (P<0.001).Conclusion.Β In detecting pneumonia in children the most sensitive signs were the symptoms' complex combining cough, hyperthermia and/or intoxication, or a combination of cough with symptoms of intoxication and respiratory failure, but the most specific clinical signs were asymmetric dullness on lung percussion and combination of asymmetric diminished breath sounds with focal crepitation/fine bubbling rales which are persisting several days against the background of the initial empirical antibiotic therapy. The most significant signs of acute obstructive bronchitis in children were: the combination of normothermia with cough, wheezing, and expiratory dyspnea, and the absence of asymmetry of percussion and auscultatory phenomena along of signs of chest distention and bandbox percussion sound during examination of the chest, which, in general, are constitute sufficient grounds for patients' assigning of desobstructive therapy.ЦСль:Β ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΡ‡ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ клиничСскиС особСнности тСчСния Π²Π½Π΅Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΏΠ½Π΅Π²ΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΈ (Π’ΠŸ) ΠΈ острого обструктивного Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…ΠΈΡ‚Π° Ρƒ Π΄Π΅Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ Ρ€Π°Π·Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ возраста для ΠΎΠΏΡ‚ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠ·Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠΈ лСчСния острой ΠΏΠ°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΈ рСспираторной систСмы.ΠœΠ°Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΠ°Π»Ρ‹ ΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹.Β ΠœΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠΌ простой случайной Π²Ρ‹Π±ΠΎΡ€ΠΊΠΈ сформирована ΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎΡ€Ρ‚Π° Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… острой рСспираторной ΠΏΠ°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΈ Π΄Π΅Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ Ρ€Π°Π·Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ возраста (75 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ²), ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡƒΡ‡Π°Π²ΡˆΠΈΡ… стационарноС Π»Π΅Ρ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅. ΠŸΠ΅Ρ€Π²ΡƒΡŽ (Π†) ΠΊΠ»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΡƒΡŽ Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΏΡƒ сформировал 51 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ с Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΡ„ΠΈΡ†ΠΈΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ Π΄ΠΈΠ°Π³Π½ΠΎΠ·ΠΎΠΌ Β«Π²Π½Π΅Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½ΠΈΡ‡Π½Π°Ρ пнСвмония, остроС Ρ‚Π΅Ρ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅Β», Π° Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΡƒΡŽ (II) ΠΊΠ»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΡƒΡŽ Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΏΡƒ вошли 24 Ρ€Π΅Π±Π΅Π½ΠΊΠ°, Ρƒ ΠΊΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹Ρ… ΠΈΠ½Ρ„ΠΈΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹ΠΉ острый процСсс Π² Π»Π΅Π³ΠΊΠΈΡ… Π±Ρ‹Π» ΠΈΡΠΊΠ»ΡŽΡ‡Π΅Π½, Ρ‚ΠΎ Π΅ΡΡ‚ΡŒ с проявлСниями бронхообструктивного синдрома (Π‘ΠžΠ‘). По основным клиничСским характСристикам Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΏΡ‹ сравнСния Π±Ρ‹Π»ΠΈ сопоставимы. ΠŸΠΎΠ»ΡƒΡ‡Π΅Π½Π½Ρ‹Π΅ Ρ€Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ исслСдования Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π°Π»ΠΈΡΡŒ с ΠΏΠΎΠΌΠΎΡ‰ΡŒΡŽ парамСтричСских ΠΈ нСпарамСтричСских ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠ², Π° ΠΎΡ†Π΅Π½ΠΊΡƒ диагностичСской цСнности тСстов ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ с ΠΏΠΎΠ·ΠΈΡ†ΠΈΠΈ клиничСской эпидСмиологии с ΡƒΡ‡Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠΌ ΠΈΡ… Ρ‡ΡƒΠ²ΡΡ‚Π²ΠΈΡ‚Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΠΈ (Π§Π’) ΠΈ спСцифичности (Π‘Π’).Π Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹. НаиболСС частыми ΠΆΠ°Π»ΠΎΠ±Π°ΠΌΠΈ Ρƒ Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… Π²Π½Π΅Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΏΠ½Π΅Π²ΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ (Π’ΠŸ) Π±Ρ‹Π»ΠΈ кашСль (100%), Π»ΠΈΡ…ΠΎΡ€Π°Π΄ΠΊΠ° (84,3%) ΠΈ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠΈ интоксикации (90,2%), ΠΊΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹Π΅ Ρ‚ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠΊΠΎ Ρƒ ΠΊΠ°ΠΆΠ΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Ρ€Π΅Π±Π΅Π½ΠΊΠ° (45,1%) ΡΠΎΡ‡Π΅Ρ‚Π°Π»ΠΈΡΡŒ с ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹ΡˆΠΊΠΎΠΉ. Π’ Ρ‚ΠΎ ΠΆΠ΅ врСмя Ρƒ Π΄Π΅Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ с Π‘ΠžΠ‘ кашСль (100% случаСв) ΠΈ ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹ΡˆΠΊΠ° (83,3% наблюдСний) Π±Ρ‹Π»ΠΈ Π²Π΅Π΄ΡƒΡ‰Π΅ΠΉ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠ±ΠΈΠ½Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ ΠΆΠ°Π»ΠΎΠ±, ΠΎΠ΄Π½Π°ΠΊΠΎ Π½Π΅Ρ€Π΅Π΄ΠΊΠΎ Π² сочСтании с симптомами интоксикации (70,8% Π»ΠΈΡ†) ΠΈ Π³ΠΈΠΏΠ΅Ρ€Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΌΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ (Π² 66,7% Π΄Π΅Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ). Анализ Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Ρ… ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ Π½Π°Π΄ Π»Π΅Π³ΠΎΡ‡Π½Ρ‹ΠΌΠΈ полями ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π» Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΡ‡ΠΈΠ΅ асиммСтричности Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Ρ„Π΅Π½ΠΎΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΎΠ² Ρƒ Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΡˆΠΈΠ½ΡΡ‚Π²Π° (90,3%) Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… I Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΏΡ‹ ΠΈ Ρƒ 16,7% II Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΏΡ‹ (Π Ο•<0,001). ΠŸΡ€ΠΈ этом сохранСниС асиммСтричности Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Π½Π°Ρ…ΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠΊ Π² Π΄ΠΈΠ½Π°ΠΌΠΈΠΊΠ΅ наблюдСния >2 дня ΠΎΡ‚ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‡Π°Π»ΠΎΡΡŒ Ρƒ 90,2% Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… ΠΏΠ½Π΅Π²ΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ ΠΈ лишь Ρƒ 12,5% ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с Π‘ΠžΠ‘ (Π Ο•<0,001). Π£ ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с Π‘ΠžΠ‘ Ρ€Π΅Π³ΠΈΡΡ‚Ρ€ΠΈΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π°Π»ΠΈΡΡŒ ΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΡƒΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΠ΅ Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Π΅ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠΈ: ослаблСнноС Π΄Ρ‹Ρ…Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π½Π°Π΄ ΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠΈΠΌΠΈ Π»Π΅Π³ΠΎΡ‡Π½Ρ‹ΠΌΠΈ полями Ρƒ ΠΊΠ°ΠΆΠ΄ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ пятого ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚Π° (20,8%), Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΡ‡ΠΈΠ΅ двустороннСй (Π±Π΅Π· асиммСтричности) ΠΊΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠΈΡ‚Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠΈ/ΠΌΠ΅Π»ΠΊΠΎΠΏΡƒΠ·Ρ‹Ρ€Ρ‡Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹Ρ… Ρ…Ρ€ΠΈΠΏΠΎΠ² β€” Ρƒ 12,5% Ρ‡Π΅Π»ΠΎΠ²Π΅ΠΊ. БвистящиС Ρ…Ρ€ΠΈΠΏΡ‹ Π±Π΅Π· ΠΈΡ… Ρ‡Π΅Ρ‚ΠΊΠΎΠΉ фиксации Π²Ρ‹ΡΠ»ΡƒΡˆΠΈΠ²Π°Π»ΠΈΡΡŒ Ρƒ всСх ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с Π‘ΠžΠ‘ ΠΈ Ρƒ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠ½Ρ‹ (52,9%) Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… ΠΏΠ½Π΅Π²ΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ (Π <0,001).Π’Ρ‹Π²ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹. НаиболСС Ρ‡ΡƒΠ²ΡΡ‚Π²ΠΈΡ‚Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹ΠΌΠΈ Π² выявлСнии ΠΏΠ½Π΅Π²ΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΈ Ρƒ Π΄Π΅Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ являСтся симптомокомплСкс, ΡΠΎΡ‡Π΅Ρ‚Π°ΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΠΉ кашлСль, Π³ΠΈΠΏΠ΅Ρ€Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΌΠΈΡŽ ΠΈ/ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΠΈΠ½Ρ‚ΠΎΠΊΡΠΈΠΊΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΡŽ, ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ комбинация кашля с явлСниями интоксикации ΠΈ Π΄Ρ‹Ρ…Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ нСдостаточности, Π° Π½Π°ΠΈΠ±ΠΎΠ»Π΅Π΅ спСцифичными срСди клиничСских ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠΎΠ² – Π°ΡΠΈΠΌΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒ притуплСния ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€ΠΊΡƒΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π»Π΅Π³ΠΎΡ‡Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π·Π²ΡƒΠΊΠ°, сочСтаниС асиммСтричности ослаблСнного дыхания с Π»ΠΎΠΊΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹ΠΌΠΈ ΠΊΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠΈΡ‚ΠΈΡ€ΡƒΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΠΌΠΈ/ΠΌΠ΅Π»ΠΊΠΎΠΏΡƒΠ·Ρ‹Ρ€Ρ‡Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ΠΌΠΈ Ρ…Ρ€ΠΈΠΏΠ°ΠΌΠΈ, ΠΊΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹Π΅ ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€ΡΠΈΡΡ‚ΠΈΡ€ΡƒΡŽΡ‚ Π½Π΅ΠΊΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ΅ врСмя Π½Π° Ρ„ΠΎΠ½Π΅ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡƒΡ‡Π°Π΅ΠΌΠΎΠΉ стартовой эмпиричСской Π°Π½Ρ‚ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΠΎΡ‚ΠΈΠΊΠΎΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ. НаиболСС Π·Π½Π°Ρ‡ΠΈΠΌΡ‹ΠΌΠΈ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠ°ΠΌΠΈ острого обструктивного Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…ΠΈΡ‚Π° Ρƒ Π΄Π΅Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ ΡΠ²Π»ΡΡŽΡ‚ΡΡ: сочСтаниС Π½ΠΎΡ€ΠΌΠΎΡ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΌΠΈΠΈ с кашлСм, Π²ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΎΠΌ ΠΈ экспираторной ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹ΡˆΠΊΠΎΠΉ; ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ обслСдовании ΠΎΡ€Π³Π°Π½ΠΎΠ² Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ΄Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΊΠ»Π΅Ρ‚ΠΊΠΈ отсутствиС асиммСтричности ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€ΠΊΡƒΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π½Ρ‹Ρ… ΠΈ Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Ρ„Π΅Π½ΠΎΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΎΠ² с ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΠ²Ρ€Π΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π½Ρ‹ΠΌΠΈ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠ°ΠΌΠΈ вздутия Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ΄Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΊΠ»Π΅Ρ‚ΠΊΠΈ ΠΈ ΠΊΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ±ΠΎΡ‡Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ Π·Π²ΡƒΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ пСркуссии, ΠΊΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹Π΅, Π² Ρ†Π΅Π»ΠΎΠΌ, ΡΠ²Π»ΡΡŽΡ‚ΡΡ основаниСм для назначСния ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚Π°ΠΌ дСзобструктивной Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ.ИсслСдования Π²Ρ‹ΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½Π΅Π½Ρ‹Β ΡΒ ΡΠΎΠ±Π»ΡŽΠ΄Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌΒ ΡΡ‚ΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΠΈΡ… ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ½Ρ†ΠΈΠΏΠΎΠ² провСдСния научных мСдицинских исслСдованиий при участии Ρ‡Π΅Π»ΠΎΠ²Π΅ΠΊΠ°,Β ΡƒΡ‚Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ΄Π΅Π½Π½Ρ‹Ρ…Β Π₯Π΅Π»ΡŒΡΠΈΠ½ΡΠΊΠΎΠΉΒ Π΄Π΅ΠΊΠ»Π°Ρ€Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅ΠΉΒ (1964–2013Β Π³Π³.)Β ΠΈΒ ΡΠΎΠΎΡ‚Π²Π΅Ρ‚ΡΡ‚Π²ΡƒΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΠΌΠΈΒ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΊΠ°Π·Π°ΠΌΠΈ ΠœΠ— Π£ΠΊΡ€Π°ΠΈΠ½Ρ‹; ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ»Β ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡΒ ΡΠΎΠ³Π»Π°ΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Β ΡΒ Π›ΠΎΠΊΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹ΠΌΒ ΡΡ‚ΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠΈΡ‚Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠΌ ΠžΠ”ΠšΠ‘Β Π΄Π»Ρ всСх участников. На провСдСниС исслСдований було получСно информированноС согласиС родитСлСй дСтСй ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΠΈΡ… ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΠΊΡƒΠ½ΠΎΠ².ΠœΠ΅Ρ‚Π°:Β Π²ΠΈΠ²Ρ‡ΠΈΡ‚ΠΈ ΠΊΠ»Ρ–Π½Ρ–Ρ‡Π½Ρ– особливості ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€Π΅Π±Ρ–Π³Ρƒ позалікарняної ΠΏΠ½Π΅Π²ΠΌΠΎΠ½Ρ–ΠΉ (ПП) Ρ‚Π° гострого обструктивного Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…Ρ–Ρ‚Ρƒ Ρƒ Π΄Ρ–Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ Ρ€Ρ–Π·Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π²Ρ–ΠΊΡƒ для ΠΎΠΏΡ‚ΠΈΠΌΡ–Π·Π°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ— лікування гострої ΠΏΠ°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³Ρ–Ρ— рСспіраторної систСми.ΠœΠ°Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Ρ–Π°Π»ΠΈ Ρ– ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈ.Β ΠœΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠΌ простої Π²ΠΈΠΏΠ°Π΄ΠΊΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡ— Π²ΠΈΠ±Ρ–Ρ€ΠΊΠΈ сформована ΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎΡ€Ρ‚Π° Ρ…Π²ΠΎΡ€ΠΈΡ… Π½Π° гостру рСспіраторну ΠΏΠ°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³Ρ–ΡŽ Π΄Ρ–Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ Ρ€Ρ–Π·Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π²Ρ–ΠΊΡƒ (75 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”Π½Ρ‚Ρ–Π²), які ΠΎΠ΄Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΡƒΠ²Π°Π»ΠΈ стаціонарнС лікування. ΠŸΠ΅Ρ€ΡˆΡƒ (Π†) ΠΊΠ»Ρ–Π½Ρ–Ρ‡Π½Ρƒ Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΡƒ сформував 51 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”Π½Ρ‚ Ρ–Π· Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΡ„Ρ–ΠΊΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠΌ Π΄Ρ–Π°Π³Π½ΠΎΠ·ΠΎΠΌ Β«ΠŸΠΎΠ·Π°Π»Ρ–ΠΊΠ°Ρ€Π½ΡΠ½Π° пнСвмонія, гострий ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€Π΅Π±Ρ–Π³Β», Π° Π΄ΠΎ Π΄Ρ€ΡƒΠ³ΠΎΡ— (Π†Π†) ΠΊΠ»Ρ–Π½Ρ–Ρ‡Π½ΠΎΡ— Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΈ ΡƒΠ²Ρ–ΠΉΡˆΠ»ΠΈ 24 Π΄ΠΈΡ‚ΠΈΠ½ΠΈ Π· проявами бронхообструктивного синдрому (Π‘ΠžΠ‘). ΠžΠ΄Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ°Π½Ρ– Ρ€Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈ аналізувалися Π·Π° допомогою ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΈΡ… Ρ– Π½Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΈΡ… ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄Ρ–Π²; ΠΎΡ†Ρ–Π½ΠΊΡƒ діагностичної цінності тСстів ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π· ΠΏΠΎΠ·ΠΈΡ†Ρ–Ρ— ΠΊΠ»Ρ–Π½Ρ–Ρ‡Π½ΠΎΡ— Π΅ΠΏΡ–Π΄Π΅ΠΌΡ–ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³Ρ–Ρ— Π· урахуванням Ρ—Ρ… чутливості (Π§Π’) Ρ‚Π° спСцифічності (Π‘Π’).Π Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈ.Β ΠΠ°ΠΉΡ‡Π°ΡΡ‚Ρ–ΡˆΠΈΠΌΠΈ скаргами Ρƒ Ρ…Π²ΠΎΡ€ΠΈΡ… Π½Π° ПП Π±ΡƒΠ»ΠΈ кашСль (100%), Π»ΠΈΡ…ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π½ΠΊΠ° (84,3%) Ρ‚Π° ΠΎΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠΈ інтоксикації (90,2%), які лишС Ρƒ ΠΊΠΎΠΆΠ½ΠΎΡ— Π΄Ρ€ΡƒΠ³ΠΎΡ— Π΄ΠΈΡ‚ΠΈΠ½ΠΈ (45,1%) поєднувалися Ρ–Π· задишкою. Водночас Ρƒ Π΄Ρ–Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ Ρ–Π· Π‘ΠžΠ‘ кашСль (100% Π²ΠΈΠΏΠ°Π΄ΠΊΡ–Π²) Ρ‚Π° задишка (83,3% ΡΠΏΠΎΡΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π΅ΠΆΠ΅Π½ΡŒ) Π±ΡƒΠ»ΠΈ ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ²Ρ–Π΄Π½ΠΎΡŽ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠ±Ρ–Π½Π°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”ΡŽ скарг, ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΡ‚Π΅ Π½Π΅Ρ€Ρ–Π΄ΠΊΠΎ Ρƒ ΠΏΠΎΡ”Π΄Π½Π°Π½Π½Ρ– Ρ–Π· симптомами інтоксикації (70,8% осіб) Ρ‚Π° Π³Ρ–ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΌΡ–Ρ”ΡŽ (Ρƒ 66,7% Π΄Ρ–Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ). Аналіз Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΈΡ… Π·ΠΌΡ–Π½ Π½Π°Π΄ Π»Π΅Π³Π΅Π½Π΅Π²ΠΈΠΌΠΈ полями ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π² Π½Π°ΡΠ²Π½Ρ–ΡΡ‚ΡŒ асимСтричності Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΈΡ… Ρ„Π΅Π½ΠΎΠΌΠ΅Π½Ρ–Π² Ρƒ Π±Ρ–Π»ΡŒΡˆΠΎΡΡ‚Ρ– (90,3%) Ρ…Π²ΠΎΡ€ΠΈΡ… Π† Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΈ Ρ‚Π° Ρƒ 16,7% Ρ…Π²ΠΎΡ€ΠΈΡ… Π†Π† Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΈ (Π Ο•<0,001). ΠŸΡ€ΠΈ Ρ†ΡŒΠΎΠΌΡƒ збСрСТСння асимСтричності Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΈΡ… Π·Π½Π°Ρ…Ρ–Π΄ΠΎΠΊ Ρƒ Π΄ΠΈΠ½Π°ΠΌΡ–Ρ†Ρ– спостСрСТСння Π΄Π²Π° Π΄Π½Ρ– Ρ‚Π° Π±Ρ–Π»ΡŒΡˆΠ΅ відмічалося Ρƒ 90,2% Ρ…Π²ΠΎΡ€ΠΈΡ… Π½Π° ΠΏΠ½Π΅Π²ΠΌΠΎΠ½Ρ–ΡŽ Ρ‚Π° лишС Ρƒ 12,5% ΠΏΠ°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”Π½Ρ‚Ρ–Π² Ρ–Π· Π‘ΠžΠ‘ (Π Ο•<0,001). Π£ ΠΏΠ°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”Π½Ρ‚Ρ–Π² Ρ–Π· Π‘ΠžΠ‘ рСєструвалися наступні Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ– ΠΎΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠΈ: ослаблСнС дихання Π½Π°Π΄ ΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠΌΠ° Π»Π΅Π³Π΅Π½Π΅Π²ΠΈΠΌΠΈ полями Ρƒ ΠΊΠΎΠΆΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏ'ятого ΠΏΠ°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”Π½Ρ‚Π° (20,8%), Π½Π°ΡΠ²Π½Ρ–ΡΡ‚ΡŒ Π΄Π²ΠΎΠ±Ρ–Ρ‡Π½ΠΎΡ— (Π±Π΅Π· асимСтричності) ΠΊΡ€Π΅ΠΏΡ–Ρ‚Π°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ—/дрібнопухирчастих Ρ…Ρ€ΠΈΠΏΡ–Π² – Ρƒ 12,5% осіб. Бвистячі Ρ…Ρ€ΠΈΠΏΠΈ Π±Π΅Π· Ρ—Ρ… Ρ‡Ρ–Ρ‚ΠΊΠΎΡ— фіксації вислуховувалися Ρƒ всіх ΠΏΠ°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”Π½Ρ‚Ρ–Π² Ρ–Π· Π‘ΠžΠ‘ Ρ‚Π° Ρƒ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠ½ΠΈ (52,9%) Ρ…Π²ΠΎΡ€ΠΈΡ… Π½Π° ПП (Π <0,001).Висновки.Β ΠΠ°ΠΉΠ±Ρ–Π»ΡŒΡˆ Ρ‡ΡƒΡ‚Π»ΠΈΠ²ΠΈΠΌΠΈ Ρƒ виявлСнні ΠΏΠ½Π΅Π²ΠΌΠΎΠ½Ρ–Ρ— Ρƒ Π΄Ρ–Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ Ρ” симптомокмплСкс, Ρ‰ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΡ”Π΄Π½ΡƒΡ” кашСль, Π³Ρ–ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΌΡ–ΡŽ Ρ‚Π°/Ρ‡ΠΈ Ρ–Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠΊΡΠΈΠΊΠ°Ρ†Ρ–ΡŽ, Π°Π±ΠΎ комбінація кашлю Ρ–Π· явищами інтоксикації Ρ‚Π° Π΄ΠΈΡ…Π°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΡ— нСдостатності, Π° Π½Π°ΠΉΠ±Ρ–Π»ΡŒΡˆ спСцифічними сСрСд ΠΊΠ»Ρ–Π½Ρ–Ρ‡Π½ΠΈΡ… ΠΎΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊ β€” Π°ΡΠΈΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΈΡ‡Π½Ρ–ΡΡ‚ΡŒ притуплСння ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€ΠΊΡƒΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π»Π΅Π³Π΅Π½Π΅Π²ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π·Π²ΡƒΠΊΡƒ, поєднання асимСтричності ослаблСного дихання Ρ–Π· локальними ΠΊΡ€Π΅ΠΏΡ–Ρ‚ΡƒΡŽΡ‡ΠΈΠΌΠΈ/Π΄Ρ€Ρ–Π±Π½ΠΎΠΏΡƒΡ…Ρ–Ρ€Ρ†Π΅Π²ΠΈΠΌΠΈ Ρ…Ρ€ΠΈΠΏΠ°ΠΌΠΈ, Ρ‰ΠΎ ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€ΡΠΈΡΡ‚ΡƒΡŽΡ‚ΡŒ дСякий час Π½Π° Ρ‚Π»Ρ– ΠΎΡ‚Ρ€ΠΈΠΌΡƒΠ²Π°Π½ΠΎΡ— стартової Π΅ΠΌΠΏΡ–Ρ€ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΎΡ— Π°Π½Ρ‚ΠΈΠ±Ρ–ΠΎΡ‚ΠΈΠΊΠΎΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΡ–Ρ—. ΠΠ°ΠΉΠ±Ρ–Π»ΡŒΡˆ Π·Π½Π°Ρ‡ΡƒΡ‰ΠΈΠΌΠΈ ΠΎΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠ°ΠΌΠΈ гострого обструктивного Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…Ρ–Ρ‚Ρƒ Ρƒ Π΄Ρ–Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ Ρ”: поєднання Π½ΠΎΡ€ΠΌΠΎΡ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΌΡ–Ρ— Ρ–Π· кашлСм, Π²Ρ–Π·ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΎΠΌ Ρ‚Π° Π΅ΠΊΡΠΏΡ–Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€Π½ΠΎΡŽ задишкою; ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ обстСТСнні ΠΎΡ€Π³Π°Π½Ρ–Π² Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡ— ΠΊΠ»Ρ–Ρ‚ΠΊΠΈ Π²Ρ–Π΄ΡΡƒΡ‚Π½Ρ–ΡΡ‚ΡŒ асимСтричності ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€ΠΊΡƒΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π½ΠΈΡ… Ρ‚Π° Π°ΡƒΡΠΊΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΈΡ… Ρ„Π΅Π½ΠΎΠΌΠ΅Π½Ρ–Π² Ρ–Π· одночасними ΠΎΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠ°ΠΌΠΈ здуття Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡ— ΠΊΠ»Ρ–Ρ‚ΠΊΠΈ Ρ– ΠΊΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ±ΠΊΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠΌ Π·Π²ΡƒΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ пСркусії, які, Π² Ρ†Ρ–Π»ΠΎΠΌΡƒ, Ρ” ΠΏΡ–Π΄ΡΡ‚Π°Π²ΠΎΡŽ для призначСння ΠΏΠ°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”Π½Ρ‚Π°ΠΌ дСзобструктивної Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΡ–Ρ—.ДослідТСння Π²ΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ½Π°Π½Ρ– Π· дотриманням Π΅Ρ‚ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΈΡ… ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ½Ρ†ΠΈΠΏΡ–Π² провСдСння Π½Π°ΡƒΠΊΠΎΠ²ΠΈΡ… ΠΌΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΈΡ… Π΄ΠΎΡΠ»Ρ–Π΄ΠΆΠ΅Π½ΡŒ Π·Π° ΡƒΡ‡Π°ΡΡ‚ΡŽ людини, Π·Π°Ρ‚Π²Π΅Ρ€Π΄ΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ… Π“Π΅Π»ΡŒΡΡ–Π½ΡΡŒΠΊΠΎΡŽ Π΄Π΅ΠΊΠ»Π°Ρ€Π°Ρ†Ρ–Ρ”ΡŽ (1964–2013 Ρ€Ρ€.) Ρ‚Π° Π²Ρ–Π΄ΠΏΠΎΠ²Ρ–Π΄Π½ΠΈΠΌΠΈ Π½Π°ΠΊΠ°Π·Π°ΠΌΠΈ ΠœΠžΠ— Π£ΠΊΡ€Π°Ρ—Π½ΠΈ; ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ» дослідТСння ΠΏΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ Π›ΠΎΠΊΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΈΠΌ Π΅Ρ‚ΠΈΡ‡Π½ΠΈΠΌ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΡ–Ρ‚Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠΌ ΠžΠ”ΠšΠ› для всіх учасників. На провСдСння Π΄ΠΎΡΠ»Ρ–Π΄ΠΆΠ΅Π½ΡŒ Π±ΡƒΠ»Π° ΠΎΡ‚Ρ€ΠΈΠΌΠ°Π½Π° ΠΏΠΎΡ–Π½Ρ„ΠΎΡ€ΠΌΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π° Π·Π³ΠΎΠ΄Π° Π±Π°Ρ‚ΡŒΠΊΡ–Π² Π΄Ρ–Ρ‚Π΅ΠΉ Π°Π±ΠΎ Ρ—Ρ…Π½Ρ–Ρ… ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΠΊΡƒΠ½Ρ–Π²
    • …
    corecore