Oxidative Inactivation of Mitochondrial Aconitase Results in Iron and H2O2-Mediated Neurotoxicity in Rat Primary Mesencephalic Cultures

BACKGROUND:Mitochondrial oxidative stress is a contributing factor in the etiology of numerous neuronal disorders. However, the precise mechanism(s) by which mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (ROS) modify cellular targets to induce the death of neurons remains unknown. The goal of this study was to determine if oxidative inactivation of mitochondrial aconitase (m-aconitase) resulted in the release of redox-active iron (Fe2+) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and whether this contributes to cell death. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Incubation of rat primary mesencephalic cultures with the redox cycling herbicide paraquat (PQ2+) resulted in increased production of H2O2 and Fe2+ at times preceding cell death. To confirm the role of m-aconitase as a source of Fenton reagents and death, we overexpressed m-aconitase using an adenoviral construct thereby increasing the target available for inactivation by ROS. Co-labeling studies identified astrocytes as the predominant cell type expressing transduced m-aconitase although neurons were identified as the primary cell type dying. Oxidative inactivation of m-aconitase overexpressing cultures resulted in exacerbation of H2O2 production, Fe2+ accumulation and increased neuronal death. Increased cell death in m-aconitase overexpressing cultures was attenuated by addition of catalase and/or a cell permeable iron chelator suggesting that neuronal death occurred in part via astrocyte-derived H2O2. CONCLUSIONS:These results suggest a role of ROS-sensitive m-aconitase as a source of Fe2+ and H2O2 and as a contributing factor to neurotoxicity

Decision tools in health care: focus on the problem, not the solution

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews or randomised-controlled trials usually help to establish the effectiveness of drugs and other health technologies, but are rarely sufficient by themselves to ensure actual clinical use of the technology. The process from innovation to routine clinical use is complex. Numerous computerised decision support systems (DSS) have been developed, but many fail to be taken up into actual use. Some developers construct technologically advanced systems with little relevance to the real world. Others did not determine whether a clinical need exists. With NHS investing £5 billion in computer systems, also occurring in other countries, there is an urgent need to shift from a technology-driven approach to one that identifies and employs the most cost-effective method to manage knowledge, regardless of the technology. The generic term, 'decision tool' (DT), is therefore suggested to demonstrate that these aids, which seem different technically, are conceptually the same from a clinical viewpoint. DISCUSSION: Many computerised DSSs failed for various reasons, for example, they were not based on best available knowledge; there was insufficient emphasis on their need for high quality clinical data; their development was technology-led; or evaluation methods were misapplied. We argue that DSSs and other computer-based, paper-based and even mechanical decision aids are members of a wider family of decision tools. A DT is an active knowledge resource that uses patient data to generate case specific advice, which supports decision making about individual patients by health professionals, the patients themselves or others concerned about them. The identification of DTs as a consistent and important category of health technology should encourage the sharing of lessons between DT developers and users and reduce the frequency of decision tool projects focusing only on technology. The focus of evaluation should become more clinical, with the impact of computer-based DTs being evaluated against other computer, paper- or mechanical tools, to identify the most cost effective tool for each clinical problem. SUMMARY: We suggested the generic term 'decision tool' to demonstrate that decision-making aids, such as computerised DSSs, paper algorithms, and reminders are conceptually the same, so the methods to evaluate them should be the same

Facile Synthesis of Amine-Functionalized Eu3+-Doped La(OH)3 Nanophosphors for Bioimaging

Here, we report a straightforward synthesis process to produce colloidal Eu3+-activated nanophosphors (NPs) for use as bioimaging probes. In this procedure, poly(ethylene glycol) serves as a high-boiling point solvent allowing for nanoscale particle formation as well as a convenient medium for solvent exchange and subsequent surface modification. The La(OH)3:Eu3+ NPs produced by this process were ~3.5 nm in diameter as determined by transmission electron microscopy. The NP surface was coated with aminopropyltriethoxysilane to provide chemical functionality for attachment of biological ligands, improve chemical stability and prevent surface quenching of luminescent centers. Photoluminescence spectroscopy of the NPs displayed emission peaks at 597 and 615 nm (λex = 280 nm). The red emission, due to 5D0 → 7F1 and 5D0 → 7F2 transitions, was linear with concentration as observed by imaging with a conventional bioimaging system. To demonstrate the feasibility of these NPs to serve as optical probes in biological applications, an in vitro experiment was performed with HeLa cells. NP emission was observed in the cells by fluorescence microscopy. In addition, the NPs displayed no cytotoxicity over the course of a 48-h MTT cell viability assay. These results suggest that La(OH)3:Eu3+ NPs possess the potential to serve as a luminescent bioimaging probe

Computerized clinical decision support systems for acute care management: A decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review of effects on process of care and patient outcomes

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Acute medical care often demands timely, accurate decisions in complex situations. Computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) have many features that could help. However, as for any medical intervention, claims that CCDSSs improve care processes and patient outcomes need to be rigorously assessed. The objective of this review was to systematically review the effects of CCDSSs on process of care and patient outcomes for acute medical care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DARE, ACP Journal Club, and others), and the Inspec bibliographic database were searched to January 2010, in all languages, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CCDSSs in all clinical areas. We included RCTs that evaluated the effect on process of care or patient outcomes of a CCDSS used for acute medical care compared with care provided without a CCDSS. A study was considered to have a positive effect (<it>i.e.</it>, CCDSS showed improvement) if at least 50% of the relevant study outcomes were statistically significantly positive.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Thirty-six studies met our inclusion criteria for acute medical care. The CCDSS improved process of care in 63% (22/35) of studies, including 64% (9/14) of medication dosing assistants, 82% (9/11) of management assistants using alerts/reminders, 38% (3/8) of management assistants using guidelines/algorithms, and 67% (2/3) of diagnostic assistants. Twenty studies evaluated patient outcomes, of which three (15%) reported improvements, all of which were medication dosing assistants.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The majority of CCDSSs demonstrated improvements in process of care, but patient outcomes were less likely to be evaluated and far less likely to show positive results.</p

Standing orders for influenza and pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination: Correlates identified in a national survey of U.S. Primary care physicians

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Standing orders programs (SOPs) allow non-physician medical staff to assess eligibility and administer vaccines without a specific physician's order. SOPs increase vaccination rates but are underutilized.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>In 2009, correlates of SOPs use for influenza vaccine and pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination (PPV) were assessed in a nationally representative, stratified random sample of U.S. physicians (n = 880) in family and internal medicine who provided office immunization. The response rate was 67%. Physicians reporting no SOPs, only influenza SOPs, and joint influenza and PPV SOPs were compared using multinomial and logistic regression models to examine individual and practice-level correlates.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>23% reported using SOPs consistently for both influenza vaccine and PPV, and 20% for influenza vaccination only, with the remainder not using SOPs. Practice-level factors that distinguished practices with joint influenza-PPV SOPs included perceived practice openness to change, strong practice teamwork, access to an electronic medical record, presence of an immunization champion in the practice, and access to nurse/physician assistant staff as opposed to medical assistants alone.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Physicians in practices with SOPs for both vaccines reported greater awareness of ACIP recommendations and/or Medicare regulations and were more likely to agree that SOPs are an effective way to boost vaccination coverage. However, implementation of both influenza and PPV SOPs was also associated with a variety of practice-level factors, including teamwork, the presence of an immunization champion, and greater availability of clinical assistants with advanced training.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Practice-level factors are critical for the adoption of more complex SOPs, such as joint SOPs for influenza and PPV.</p