Ancrage/institutionnalisation des actions de l'OFSP visant à la réduction des problèmes liés à la toxicomanie : l'appréciation des responsables des programmes

[Table des matières] 1. Introduction. 2. Concepts et modèles d'ancrage. 3. Méthode. 4. Analyse de l'ancrage des programmes. 4.1 Programme Prévention des dépendances dans les communes (RADIX). 4.2 Programme Voilà. 4.3 Programme Fil rouge. 4.4 Programme Funtasy Projects. 4.5 Programme-cadre Ecoles et santé / REES-CH. 4.6 La "Formation des médiateurs scolaires de Suisse romande et du Tessin" et le Projet "Médication" (Ecoles et santé). 4.7 Programme "Drogue ou Sport?", Service "Drogues et sport", Programme "Sport et drogues" / LaOla. 4.8 Les projets soutenus par le Bureau suisse pour la réduction des risques liés aux drogues (OSEO). 4.9 Matériel de prévention de la toxicomanie produit par l'ISPA. 5. Conclusions : Les éléments transversaux d'ancrage des programmes. 6. Annexes.

Y1 receptor knockout increases nociception and prevents the anti-allodynic actions of NPY.

OBJECTIVE: Recent pharmacologic studies in our laboratory have suggested that the spinal neuropeptide Y (NPY) Y1 receptor contributes to pain inhibition and to the analgesic effects of NPY. To rule out off-target effects, the present study used Y1-receptor-deficient (-/-) mice to further explore the contribution of Y1 receptors to pain modulation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Y1(-/-) mice exhibited reduced latency in the hotplate test of acute pain and a longer-lasting heat allodynia in the complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA) model of inflammatory pain. Y1 deletion did not change CFA-induced inflammation. Upon targeting the spinal NPY systems with intrathecal drug delivery, NPY reduced tactile and heat allodynia in the CFA model and the partial sciatic nerve ligation model of neuropathic pain. Importantly, we show for the first time that NPY does not exert these anti-allodynic effects in Y1(-/-) mice. Furthermore, in nerve-injured CD1 mice, concomitant injection of the potent Y1 antagonist BIBO3304 prevented the anti-allodynic actions of NPY. Neither NPY nor BIBO3304 altered performance on the Rotorod test, arguing against an indirect effect of motor function. CONCLUSION: The Y1 receptor contributes to pain inhibition and to the analgesic effects of NPY.

Batalin-Vilkovisky analysis of covariant and noncovariant actions

The equivalence between the covariant and the noncovariant versions of a constrained system is shown to hold after quantization in the framework of the field-antifield formalism. Our study covers the cases of electromagnetism and Yang-Mills fields and sheds light on some aspects of the Faddeev-Popov method, for both the covariant and noncovariant approaches, which have not been fully clarified in the literature.

Gauge-invariant actions from constraint Hamiltonian dynamics

Dirac's constraint Hamiltonian formalism is used to construct a gauge-invariant action for the massive spin-one and -two fields.

Batalin-Vilkovisky analysis of covariant and noncovariant actions

The equivalence between the covariant and the noncovariant versions of a constrained system is shown to hold after quantization in the framework of the field-antifield formalism. Our study covers the cases of electromagnetism and Yang-Mills fields and sheds light on some aspects of the Faddeev-Popov method, for both the covariant and noncovariant approaches, which have not been fully clarified in the literature.

The role of actions in auditory object discrimination.

Action representations can interact with object recognition processes. For example, so-called mirror neurons respond both when performing an action and when seeing or hearing such actions. Investigations of auditory object processing have largely focused on categorical discrimination, which begins within the initial 100 ms post-stimulus onset and subsequently engages distinct cortical networks. Whether action representations themselves contribute to auditory object recognition and the precise kinds of actions recruiting the auditory-visual mirror neuron system remain poorly understood. We applied electrical neuroimaging analyses to auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) in response to sounds of man-made objects that were further subdivided between sounds conveying a socio-functional context and typically cuing a responsive action by the listener (e.g. a ringing telephone) and those that are not linked to such a context and do not typically elicit responsive actions (e.g. notes on a piano). This distinction was validated psychophysically by a separate cohort of listeners. Beginning approximately 300 ms, responses to such context-related sounds significantly differed from context-free sounds both in the strength and topography of the electric field. This latency is >200 ms subsequent to general categorical discrimination. Additionally, such topographic differences indicate that sounds of different action sub-types engage distinct configurations of intracranial generators. Statistical analysis of source estimations identified differential activity within premotor and inferior (pre)frontal regions (Brodmann's areas (BA) 6, BA8, and BA45/46/47) in response to sounds of actions typically cuing a responsive action. We discuss our results in terms of a spatio-temporal model of auditory object processing and the interplay between semantic and action representations.