康复护理教学中应用Seminar教学法的分析

目的 探讨康复护理教学中应用Seminar教学法的效果.方法 选择医院2018年6月—2019年6月在肿瘤科实习的80名护理学生作为本次研究入组对象,根据随机数字表随机分为研究组和对照组,每组40名学生.对照组采用传统护理教学方法 ,研究组采用Seminar教学法,分析对比两组护理学生的教学效果.结果 研究组护理学生理论考试、技能考试、综合成绩高于对照组护理学生成绩(P<0.05).研究组护理学生自主学习情况由于对照组护理学生(P<0.05).结论 康复护理教学中应用Seminar教学法的效果好,有利于激发学生学习兴趣,巩固学生护理基本知识技能,提高护理思维能力,从而提高护理教学质量.     

顶天立地服务需求 注重内涵创建一流——首都医科大学建校60周年教育教学与人才培养成果回顾

首都医科大学通过60年辛勤耕耘、精益求精，秉承“顶天立地”的人才培养理念，为社会培养了大批高水平的学术型与应用型医药卫生人才。回顾学校60年来本专科教育、全科医学教育、国际教育、研究生教育的人才培养成果，以总结经验并鼓舞全体首医人进一步求真务实、凝心聚力、积极进取、追求卓越，努力将学校建设成为国际一流的研究型医科大学。     

Myeloid-derived suppressor cell (MDSC) key genes analysis in rat anti-CD28-induced immune tolerance kidney transplantation

BackgroundIn the field of transplantation, inducing immune tolerance in recipients is of great importance. Blocking co-stimulatory molecule using anti-CD28 antibody could induce tolerance in a rat kidney transplantation model. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) reveals strong immune suppressive abilities in kidney transplantation. Here we analyzed key genes of MDSCs leading to transplant tolerance in this model.MethodsMicroarray data of rat gene expression profiles under accession number {"type":"entrez-geo","attrs":{"text":"GSE28545","term_id":"28545"}}GSE28545 in the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database were analyzed. Running the LIMMA package in R language, the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were found. Enrichment analysis of the DEGs was conducted in the Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery (DAVID) database to explore gene ontology (GO) annotation and their Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways. Their protein-protein interactions (PPIs) were provided by STRING database and was visualized in Cytoscape. Hub genes were carried out by CytoHubba.ResultsThree hundred and thirty-eight DEGs were exported, including 27 upregulated and 311 downregulated genes. The functions and KEGG pathways of the DEGs were assessed and the PPI network was constructed based on the string interactions of the DEGs. The network was visualized in Cytoscape; the entire PPI network consisted of 192 nodes and 469 edges. Zap70, Cdc42, Stat1, Stat4, Ccl5 and Cxcr3 were among the hub genes.ConclusionsThese key genes, corresponding proteins and their functions may provide valuable background for both basic and clinical research and could be the direction of future studies in immune tolerance, especially those examining immunocyte-induced tolerance.     

Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials: Efficacy and Safety of UDCA-Based Therapies in Primary Biliary Cirrhosis

Major ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-based therapies for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) include UDCA only, or combined with either methotrexate (MTX), corticosteroids (COT), colchicine (COC), or bezafibrate (BEF). As the optimum treatment regimen is unclear and warrants exploration, we aimed to compare these therapies in terms of patient mortality or liver transplantation (MOLT) and adverse events (AE).PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials up to August 31, 2014. We estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) for MOLT and odds ratios (ORs) for AE. A sensitivity analysis based on the dose of UDCA was also executed.Thirty-one eligible articles were included. Compared with COT plus UDCA, UDCA (HR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09–1.39), BEF plus UDCA (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.02–4.83), COC plus UDCA (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.07–2.25), MTX plus UDCA (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05–1.63), or OBS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.11–2.01) all provided an increased risk of MOLT. With respect to drug AE profile, although not differing appreciably, BEF plus UDCA was associated with more AEs compared with UDCA (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.59–20.67), COT plus UDCA (OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.15–33.36), COC plus UDCA (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09–12.16), MTX plus UDCA (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.23–17.82), or OBS (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.53–20.75). The results of sensitivity analyses were highly consistent with previous analyses.COT plus UDCA was the optimal UDCA-based regimen for both MOLT and AEs. BEF plus UDCA was most likely to cause AEs, whereas monotherapy with UDCA and coadministriation of COT plus UDCA appeared to be associated with the fewest AEs for PBC treatment.     

Comparison between a new platelet count drop method PL-11, light transmission aggregometry,VerifyNow aspirin system and thromboelastography for monitoring short-term aspirin effects in healthy individuals

Platelet function has been described by many laboratory assays, and PL-11 is a new point-of-care platelet function analyzer based on platelet count drop method, which counts platelet before and after the addition of agonists in the citrated whole blood samples. The present study sought to compare PL-11 with other three major more established assays, light transmission aggregometry (LTA), VerifyNow? aspirin system and thromboelastography (TEG), for monitoring the short-term aspirin responses in healthy individuals. Ten healthy young men took 100?mg/d aspirin for 3-day treatment. Platelet function was measured via PL-11, LTA, VerifyNow and TEG, respectively. The blood samples were collected at baseline, 2 hour, 1 day during the aspirin treatment and 1 day, 5?±?1 days, 8?±?1 days after the aspirin withdrawal. Moreover, 90 additional healthy subjects were recruited to establish a reference range for PL-11. Platelet function of healthy subjects decreased significantly 2 hours after 100?mg/d aspirin intake and began to recover during 4–6 days after the aspirin withdrawal. Correlations between methods were PL-11 vs. LTA (r?=?0.614, p?<?0.01); PL-11 vs. VerifyNow (r?=?0.829, p?<?0.01); PL-11 vs. TEG (r?=?0.697, p?<?0.001). There was no significant bias between PL-11 and LTA at baseline (bias?=?1.94%, p?=?0.804) using Bland-Altman analysis, while the data of PL-11 were significantly higher than LTA (bias?=?24.02%, p?<?0.001) during the aspirin therapy. The reference range for PL-11 in healthy young individuals was from 66.8 to 90.5% (95%CI). When aspirin low-responsiveness was defined as LTA?>?20%, the cut-off values for each method were, respectively: PL-11?>?50%, VerifyNow?>?533 ARU, TEG?>?60.2%. The results of different platelet function assays were uninterchangeable for monitoring aspirin response and correlations among them were also varied. Correlations among PL-11 and other three major assays suggested the ability of PL-11 to assess the treatment effects of aspirin. But a large cohort study is needed to confirm the cut-off value of aspirin response detected by PL-11.