不同地区婴幼儿轮状病毒感染性腹泻的流行病学研究

目的 分析比较不同地区婴幼儿轮状病毒(RV)感染性腹泻的流行病学特征。方法 于2001年9月至2003年9月在江苏省苏州市和安徽省马鞍山市各选择一所医院建立临床监测哨点,以临床就诊的<5岁腹泻患儿为研究对象,用酶联免疫吸附试验检测RV抗原,同时采用逆转录聚合酶链反应对RV毒株进行血清型与基因型的鉴定。结果 (1)两地区RV感染均呈现明显的秋冬季节性,但季节高峰有所不同,高峰季节的感染率可达50％～80％;(2)两地区腹泻患儿RV感染率差异具有统计学意义,住院腹泻患儿的平均感染率分别为47.28％和30.38％,门诊腹泻患儿平均感染率分别为28.39％和14.77％;(3)两地区RV的感染率均表现出年龄分布的不同,以6～35月龄组较高,无性别差异;(4)苏州市的两个流行高峰均以G3型为主,其次是G1型;马鞍山市第一个流行高峰以G1型为主,第二个高峰则以G3型为主;两地区流行株的G/P组合型与国内外有所不同。结论 婴幼儿RV腹泻在地区、时间以及病毒流行株分布等方面各有不同,提示RV感染的监测工作对其疫苗的研制和应用具有重要的指导作用。     

SOCIAL TRAINING IN A WARD SITUATION

Two groups of adult male trainees of varying levels of retardation were instructed and monitored over a period of 9 months in various aspects of social education. The training took place in an up-graded home-orientated atmosphere. Group A and B together showed an increase of 44 per cent in skill competence over the 9 month period and 46 per cent increase over the control group.     

Repurposing povidone-iodine to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission: a narrative review

BackgroundAccumulating data suggest antiviral effects of povidone-iodine against the Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. This narrative review aims to examine the antiviral mechanisms of povidone-iodine, efficacy of povidone-iodine against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and safety of povidone-iodine to human epithelial cells and thyroid function.MethodsWe searched the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for articles containing the keywords “povidone-iodine”, “SARS-CoV-2” and “COVID-19” from database inception till 3 June 2021.ResultsDespite in vitro data supporting the anti-SARS-CoV-2 effects of povidone-iodine, findings from clinical studies revealed differences in treatment response depending on study settings (healthy vs. hospitalized individuals), treatment target (nasal vs. oral vs. pharynx), method of administration (oral rinse vs. gargle vs. throat spray) and choice of samples used to measure study endpoints (nasopharyngeal vs. saliva). One large-scale clinical trial demonstrated reduction in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among participants who administered povidone-iodine 3 times daily during an active outbreak. Povidone-iodine is also used to disinfect the oro-pharyngeal space prior to dental or otolaryngology procedures. Although existing data suggest minimal impact of povidone-iodine on thyroid function, high-quality safety data are presently lacking.ConclusionsPovidone-iodine application to the oropharyngeal space could complement existing non-pharmacological interventions to reduce SARS-CoV-2 infection especially in high exposure settings.

Key messages

• Accumulating data suggest antiviral effects of povidone-iodine against the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
• Findings from clinical studies reveal differences in treatment response depending on study settings, treatment target, method of administration and choice of samples used to measure study endpoints. One large-scale clinical trial observed reduction in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among participants who administered povidone-iodine 3 times daily during an active outbreak.
• Povidone-iodine application to the oropharyngeal space could complement existing non-pharmacological interventions to reduce SARS-CoV-2 infection especially in high exposure settings.

     

Risk-Adjusted Cancer Screening and Prevention (RiskAP): Complementing Screening for Early Disease Detection by a Learning Screening Based on Risk Factors

BackgroundRisk-adjusted cancer screening and prevention is a promising and continuously emerging option for improving cancer prevention. It is driven by increasing knowledge of risk factors and the ability to determine them for individual risk prediction. However, there is a knowledge gap between evidence of increased risk and evidence of the effectiveness and efficiency of clinical preventive interventions based on increased risk. This gap is, in particular, aggravated by the extensive availability of genetic risk factor diagnostics, since the question of appropriate preventive measures immediately arises when an increased risk is identified. However, collecting proof of effective preventive measures, ideally by prospective randomized preventive studies, typically requires very long periods of time, while the knowledge about an increased risk immediately creates a high demand for action.SummaryTherefore, we propose a risk-adjusted prevention concept that is based on the best current evidence making needed and appropriate preventive measures available, and which is constantly evaluated through outcome evaluation, and continuously improved based on these results. We further discuss the structural and procedural requirements as well as legal and socioeconomical aspects relevant for the implementation of this concept.