Design-Build Experiences and Student Safety

Design-build experiences (DBEs) are an essential element of any programme based on the CDIO methodology. They enable students to develop practical hands-on skills, they enable the learning of theory by stealth and they provide a forum for developing professional skills such as team working and project management. The hands-on aspect of certain DBEs has significant risk associated with it, which must be addressed through the formal evaluation of risks and the development of a methodology for controlling them. This paper considers the aspects of design-build experiences that may impact on student safety. In particular, it examines the risk associated with each of the four stages of CDIO and gives examples of risks which may commonly apply across engineering disciplines. A system for assessing and controlling the risks in any particular DBE is presented and the paper finishes by discussing the significance of health and safety in the educational environment.

A descriptive study of the usage of spinal manipulative therapy techniques within a randomised clinical trial in acute low back pain

The majority of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of spinal manipulative therapy have not adequately de?ned the terms ‘mobilization’ and ‘manipulation’, nor distinguished between these terms in reporting the trial interventions. The purpose of this study was to describe the spinal manipulative therapy techniques utilized within a RCT of manipulative therapy (MT; n=80), interferential therapy (IFT; n=80), and a combination of both (CT; n=80) for people with acute low back pain (LBP). Spinal manipulative therapy was de?ned as any ‘mobilization’ (low velocity manual force without a thrust) or ‘manipulation’ (high velocity
thrust) techniques of the spine described by Maitland and Cyriax.
The 16 physiotherapists, all members of the Society of Orthopaedic Medicine, utilized three spinal manipulative therapy patterns in the RCT: Maitland Mobilization (40.4%, n=59), Maitland Mobilization/Cyriax Manipulation (40.4%, n=59) and Cyriax Manipulation (19.1%, n=28). There was a signi?cant difference between the MT and CT groups in their usage of spinal manipulative therapy techniques (w2=9.178; df=2;P=0.01); subjects randomized to the CT group received three times more Cyriax Manipulation (29.2%, n=21/72) than those randomized to the MT group (9.5%, n=7/74; df=1; P=0.003).
The use of mobilization techniques within the trial was comparable with their usage by the general population of physiotherapists in Britain and Ireland for LBP management. However, the usage of manipulation techniques was considerably higher than reported in physiotherapy surveys and may re?ect the postgraduate training of trial therapists.

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Novel Recombinant Subunit Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine (BBG2Na) in Healthy Young Adults

A novel recombinant respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) subunit vaccine, designated BBG2Na, was administered to 108 healthy adults randomly assigned to receive 10, 100, or 300 μg of BBG2Na in aluminum phosphate or saline placebo. Each subject received 1, 2, or 3 intramuscular injections of the assigned dose at monthly intervals. Local and systemic reactions were mild, and no evidence of harmful properties of BBG2Na was reported. The highest ELISA and virus-neutralizing (VN) antibody responses were evident in the 100- and 300-μg groups; second or third injections provided no significant boosts against RSV-derived antigens. BBG2Na induced ⩾2-fold and ⩾4-fold increases in G2Na-specific ELISA units in up to 100% and 57% of subjects, respectively; corresponding RSV-A–specific responses were 89% and 67%. Furthermore, up to 71% of subjects had ⩾2-fold VN titer increases. Antibody responses to 2 murine lung protective epitopes were also highly boosted after vaccination. Therefore, BBG2Na is safe, well tolerated, and highly immunogenic in RSV-seropositive adults

Analysis of receptor (CD46, CD150) usage by measles virus

This is a collaborative paper between Juergen Schneider-Schaulies's group and ours. It shows the differential use of the two measles receptors in various strains.