Space and Motion Perception and Discomfort in Air Travel

RAMOS RT, MATTOS DA, REBOUCAS ITS, RANVAUD RD. Space and motion perception and discomfort in air travel. Aviat Space Environ Med 2012; 83:1162-6. Introduction: The perception of comfort during air trips is determined by several factors. External factors like cabin design and environmental parameters (temperature, humidity, air pressure, noise, and vibration) interact with individual characteristics (anxiety traits, fear of flying, and personality) from arrival at the airport to landing at the destination. In this study, we investigated the influence of space and motion discomfort (SMD), fear of heights, and anxiety on comfort perception during all phases of air travel. Methods: We evaluated 51 frequent air travelers through a modified version of the Flight Anxiety Situations Questionnaire (FAS), in which new items were added and where the subjects were asked to report their level of discomfort or anxiety (not fear) for each phase of air travel (Chronbach's alpha = 0.974). Correlations were investigated among these scales: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAB, Cohen's Acrophobia Questionnaire, and the Situational Characteristics Questionnaire (SitQ, designed to estimate SMD levels). Results: Scores of SitQ correlated with discomfort in situations involving space and movement perception (Pearson's rho = 0.311), while discomfort was associated with cognitive mechanisms related to scores in the anxiety scales (Pearson's rho = 0.375). Anxiety traits were important determinants of comfort perception before and after flight, while the influence of SMD was more significant during the time spent in the aircraft cabin. Discussion: SMD seems to be an important modulator of comfort perception in air travel. Its influence on physical well being and probably on cognitive performance, with possible effects on flight safety, deserves further investigation.

HEALTH PROBLEMS AWARENESS DURING TRAVEL AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS OF A LARGE UNIVERSITY IN LATIN AMERICA. PRELIMINARY REPORT

Health safety during trips is based on previous counseling, vaccination and prevention of infections, previous diseases or specific problems related to the destination. Our aim was to assess two aspects, incidence of health problems related to travel and the traveler’s awareness of health safety. To this end we phone-interviewed faculty members of a large public University, randomly selected from humanities, engineering and health schools. Out of 520 attempts, we were able to contact 67 (12.9%) and 46 (68.6%) agreed to participate in the study. There was a large male proportion (37/44, 84.1%), mature adults mostly in their forties and fifties (32/44, 72.7%), all of them with higher education, as you would expect of faculty members. Most described themselves as being sedentary or as taking occasional exercise, with only 15.9% (7/44) taking regular exercise. Preexisting diseases were reported by 15 travelers. Most trips lasted usually one week or less. Duration of the travel was related to the destination, with (12h) or longer trips being taken by 68.2% (30/44) of travelers, and the others taking shorter (3h) domestic trips. Most travelling was made by air (41/44) and only 31.8% (14/44) of the trips were motivated by leisure. Field research trips were not reported. Specific health counseling previous to travel was reported only by two (4.5%). Twenty seven of them (61.4%) reported updated immunization, but 11/30 reported unchecked immunizations. 30% (9/30) reported travel without any health insurance coverage. As a whole group, 6 (13.6%) travelers reported at least one health problem attributed to the trip. All of them were males travelling abroad. Five presented respiratory infections, such as influenza and common cold, one neurological, one orthopedic, one social and one hypertension. There were no gender differences regarding age groups, destination, type of transport, previous health counseling, leisure travel motivation or pre-existing diseases. Interestingly, the two cases of previous health counseling were made by domestic travelers. Our data clearly shows that despite a significant number of travel related health problems, these highly educated faculty members, had a low awareness of those risks, and a significant number of travels are made without prior counseling or health insurance. A counseling program conducted by a tourism and health professional must be implemented for faculty members in order to increase the awareness of travel related health problems.

Prevalence of the BRCA1 founder mutation c.5266dupin Brazilian individuals at-risk for the hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome

About 5-10% of breast and ovarian carcinomas are hereditary and most of these result from germline mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. In women of Ashkenazi Jewish ascendance, up to 30% of breast and ovarian carcinomas may be attributable to mutations in these genes, where 3 founder mutations, c.68_69del (185delAG) and c.5266dup (5382insC) in BRCA1 and c.5946del (6174delT) in BRCA2, are commonly encountered. It has been suggested by some authors that screening for founder mutations should be undertaken in all Brazilian women with breast cancer. Thus, the goal of this study was to determine the prevalence of three founder mutations, commonly identified in Ashkenazi individuals in a sample of non-Ashkenazi cancer-affected Brazilian women with clearly defined risk factors for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome. Among 137 unrelated Brazilian women from HBOC families, the BRCA1c.5266dup mutation was identified in seven individuals (5%). This prevalence is similar to that encountered in non-Ashkenazi HBOC families in other populations. However, among patients with bilateral breast cancer, the frequency of c.5266dup was significantly higher when compared to patients with unilateral breast tumors (12.1% vs 1.2%, p = 0.023). The BRCA1 c.68_69del and BRCA2 c.5946del mutations did not occur in this sample. We conclude that screening non-Ashkenazi breast cancer-affected women from the ethnically heterogeneous Brazilian populations for the BRCA1 c.68_69del and BRCA2 c.5946del is not justified, and that screening for BRCA1c.5266dup should be considered in high risk patients, given its prevalence as a single mutation. In high-risk patients, a negative screening result should always be followed by comprehensive BRCA gene testing. The finding of a significantly higher frequency of BRCA1 c.5266dup in women with bilateral breast cancer, as well as existence of other as yet unidentified founder mutations in this population, should be further assessed in a larger well characterized high-risk cohort.