GeoPost-it : Geo-­posicionamiento informativo para móviles

GeoPost-it es una aplicación móvil para insertar notas privadas y públicas basadas en la posición del dispositivo.

Population based screening - the difficulty of how to do more good than harm and how to achieve it.

Screening people without symptoms of disease is an attractive idea. Screening allows early detection of disease or elevated risk of disease, and has the potential for improved treatment and reduction of mortality. The list of future screening opportunities is set to grow because of the refinement of screening techniques, the increasing frequency of degenerative and chronic diseases, and the steadily growing body of evidence on genetic predispositions for various diseases. But how should we decide on the diseases for which screening should be done and on recommendations for how it should be implemented? We use the examples of prostate cancer and genetic screening to show the importance of considering screening as an ongoing population-based intervention with beneficial and harmful effects, and not simply the use of a test. Assessing whether screening should be recommended and implemented for any named disease is therefore a multi-dimensional task in health technology assessment. There are several countries that already use established processes and criteria to assess the appropriateness of screening. We argue that the Swiss healthcare system needs a nationwide screening commission mandated to conduct appropriate evidence-based evaluation of the impact of proposed screening interventions, to issue evidence-based recommendations, and to monitor the performance of screening programmes introduced. Without explicit processes there is a danger that beneficial screening programmes could be neglected and that ineffective, and potentially harmful, screening procedures could be introduced.

The interplay between radiation and the immune system in the field of post-radical pneumonitis and fibrosis and why it is important to understand it.

A discussion on the importance and pathogenesis of radiation-induced pneumonitis and fibrosis is provided, with a special focus on the role of the immune system. The need to understand this interaction is highlighted in view of emerging therapeutic potential.

Small access (30F) clinical central venous smart cannulation: is it adequate?

OBJECTIVES: To assess the performance of 45F vs. 36F smartcanula in CPB with gravity drainage alone. METHODS: Twenty patients were randomly assigned to two groups receiving for venous drainage a smartcanula which is collapsed over a mandrel for trans-atrial insertion into the inferior vena cava and expanded in situ to either 45F or 36F. RESULTS: Valve replacement/repair was realized in 7/10 and/or CABG in 6/10 for 36F (69+/-13 years) vs. 5/10 and 5/10, respectively, for 45F (63+/-11 years: NS). Body weight and surface area (BSA) were 83+/-9 kg (1.9+/-0.2 m2, max 2.2 m2) for 36F vs. 79+/-6 kg: NS (1.9+/-0.1 m2 (NS), max 2.1 m2) for 45F. Insertion and access orifice diameter (area) was 6 mm and 10 mm (78.5 mm2) for the 36F vs. 6 mm and 13 mm (132 mm2) for the 45F (+69%). Calculated target pump flow (2.4 l/min/m2) was 4.7+/-0.4 l/min for 36F vs. 4.5+/-0.3 l/min for 45F. Achieved pump flow accounted for 5.0+/-0.3 l/min for 36F (8% above target) vs. 4.8+/-0.3 l/min for 45F (8% above target): NS. The water balance during the pump run (clear volume added minus hemofilter and urine output) was 2.2+/-0.3 l for 36F vs. 2.0 l for 45F: NS. CONCLUSION: Due to its 'open' wall (the vena cava provides the seal), its reduced wall thickness (range: 0.0-0.4 mm), and its self-expanding design, the 36F smartcanula requiring a 30F access orifice has sufficient drainage capacity by gravity alone for full CPB in adults with a BSA up to 2.2 mm2.

Why do they separate it or not? Attitudes and behaviors towards organic waste separation

This article shows the results of an exploratory study related to the separation of organic waste in order to offer suggestions for the improvement of waste disposal communication campaigns. The overall objective is to analyze attitude and behavior of those who do and those who do not separate organic waste, related to a specific promotional campaign carried out in two neighborhoods, in the municipality of Badalona (Spain), within the framework of the study of proenvironmental attitudes and behaviors and based on the Psychosocial Four Spheres Model. 1,010 interviews were conducted and data was analyzed using Chi-Squared Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID). Waste separation behavior was used as a dependent variable. The reasons given to explain why people do or do not separate organic waste and sociodemographic variables, have been introduced as independent variables. In accordance with the Four Spheres Model, results show significant differences in waste separation. Based on the profiles obtained, we find some predictive variables that facilitate the development of communication campaigns according to the requirements of each community.

Why do they separate it or not? Attitudes and behaviors towards organic waste separation

This article shows the results of an exploratory study related to the separation of organic waste in order to offer suggestions for the improvement of waste disposal communication campaigns. The overall objective is to analyze attitude and behavior of those who do and those who do not separate organic waste, related to a specific promotional campaign carried out in two neighborhoods, in the municipality of Badalona (Spain), within the framework of the study of proenvironmental attitudes and behaviors and based on the Psychosocial Four Spheres Model. 1,010 interviews were conducted and data was analyzed using Chi-Squared Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID). Waste separation behavior was used as a dependent variable. The reasons given to explain why people do or do not separate organic waste and sociodemographic variables, have been introduced as independent variables. In accordance with the Four Spheres Model, results show significant differences in waste separation. Based on the profiles obtained, we find some predictive variables that facilitate the development of communication campaigns according to the requirements of each community.

Kristillisyys Karjalassa ja Itä-Suomessa keskiajalla

Zusammenfassung: Das Christentum in Karelien und in Ostfinnland während des Mittelalters

What is the Omega-Loop Gastric Bypass and Why is it Criticized?

The omega-loop gastric bypass (OLGBP), also called "mini-gastric bypass" or "single-anastomosis" gastric bypass is a form of gastric bypass where a long, narrow gastric pouch is created and anastomosed to the jejunum about 200- 250 cm from the angle of Treitz in an omega loop fashion, thereby avoiding a jejuno-jejunostomy.Proponents of the OLGBP claim that it is a safer and simpler operation than the traditional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP), easier to teach, that gives the same results in terms of weight loss than the RYGBP. One randomized study comparing the two techniques showed similar results after five years.The OLGBP is criticized because it creates an anastomosis between the gastric pouch and the jejunum where a large amount of biliopancreatic juices travel, thereby creating a situation where reflux of the latter into the stomach and distal esophagus is likely to develop. Such a situation has clearly been associated, in several animal studies, with an increased incidence of gastric cancer, especially at or close to the gastro-jejunostomy, and with an increased risk of lower esophageal cancer. In clinical practice, omega-loop gastrojejunostomies such as those used for reconstruction after gastric resection for benign disease or distal gastric cancer have been associated with the so called classical anastomotic cancer, linked to biliary reflux into the stomach, despite the fact that epidemiological studies about this do not show uniform results. Although no evidence at the present time links OLGBP to an increased risk of gastric cancer in the human, this possibility raises a concern among many bariatric surgeons, especially in the view that bariatric surgery is performed in relatively young patients with a long life expectancy, hence prone to develop cancer if indeed the risk is increased. Another arguments used against the OLGBP is that the jejuno-jejunostomy in the traditional RYGBP is easy to perform and associated with virtually no complication.Supporters of the OLGBP claim that the liquid that refluxes into the stomach after their procedure is not pure bile and pancreatic juice, but a combination of those with jejunal secretions, and that the latter is not as harmful. We would urge the proponents of the OLGBP to undertake the necessary animal studies to show that their assumption is indeed true before the procedure is performed widely, possibly leading to the development of hundreds of late gastric or esophageal carcinoma in the bariatric population. In the meantime, we strongly believe that RYGBP should remain the gold standard in gastric bypass surgery for morbid obesity.