台州市功能性消化不良的流行病学现状调查及影响因素分析

目的 探讨台州市功能性消化不良的流行病学现状及影响因素。方法 回顾性选取2020年1月至2022年2月浙江省台州医院收治的功能性消化不良患者200例，统计患者的一般资料，分析该病的流行病学现状，对功能性消化不良的影响因素进行单因素分析，然后将差异有统计学意义的因素再进一步纳入多因素Logistic回归分析。结果 200例功能性消化不良患者中，女性发病率高于男性；30~60岁年龄段群体，患病率最高；存在暴饮暴食、喜食烫食、挑食、多食酸制品、未准时进食、常食宵夜、睡眠时间<6h、有药物过敏史、有功能性消化不良家族史、存在便秘情况者的患病率均高于未存在以上情况者，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。多因素Logistic回归分析显示，性别、年龄、暴饮暴食、喜食烫食、挑食、多食酸制品、未准时进食、宵夜摄取情况、每天睡眠时间、药物过敏史、家族史、便秘是该病患病率升高的主要影响因素。结论 性别、年龄、暴饮暴食、喜食烫食、挑食、酸制品、未准时进食情况、宵夜摄取情况、每天睡眠时间、药物过敏史、家族史、便秘是功能性消化不良的主要影响因素。     

Event-related potential changes due to early-onset Parkinson’s disease in parkin (PARK2) gene mutation carriers and non-carriers

ObjectiveTo investigate cognitive functions in non-demented patients with early-onset Parkinson's disease (PD), and to compare PARK2 gene mutation carriers and non-carriers by means of event-related brain potentials (ERPs).MethodsThe participants comprised patients with early-onset PD (EOPD) and healthy controls (HC). Patients with EOPD were divided into two groups as carriers of known pathogenic variants of PARK2 gene (EOPD-PC) and non-carriers of genes involved in familial PD (EOPD-NC). ERP data were collected during auditory oddball and visual continuous performance test (CPT).ResultsBoth EOPD groups (EOPD-PC and EOPD-NC) displayed reduced and delayed P3 in response to oddball target and CPT NoGo. CPT Go P3 was reduced in EOPD-NC but not in EOPD-PC. Oddball target N1 was reduced and P2 was enhanced in both EOPD-PC and EOPD-NC. In both cognitive tasks, RTs were prolonged and accuracy was lower in EOPD-PC and EOPD-NC.ConclusionsWe found several EOPD-related neurophysiologic changes, implying impairments in cognitive functions. Pairwise comparisons between EOPD-PC and EOPD-NC revealed no significant ERP marker.SignificanceIn this study, the confounding effect of normative aging was somewhat excluded compared with many previous studies. In contrast with the many oddball studies in non-demented PD, we clearly observed reduced and prolonged P3 in early-onset PD. Our NoGo P3 findings also contribute to the limited ERP research concerning response inhibition.     

Preparing IR for COVID-19: The Singapore Experience

This paper describes country-wide special measures undertaken for interventional radiology staff during the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Although each interventional radiology service around the world faces unique challenges, the principles outlined in this article will be useful when designing or strengthening individual practices and integrating them within wider hospital and national measures. Moving beyond the current outbreak, these measures will be useful for any future infectious diseases which are likely to arise.     

Cardiovascular risk assessment tools: A scoping review

ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to describe cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment methods and to identify evidence-based practice recommendations when dealing with population at risk of developing cardiovascular diseases.Review methods and data sourcesA literature review following the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review methodology was conducted. By using appropriate key terms, literature searches were conducted in PubMed, SciELO, Cochrane Library, Dialnet, ENFISPO, Medigraphic, ScienceDirect, Cuiden, and Lilacs databases. A complementary search on websites related to the area of interest was conducted. Articles published in English or Spanish in peer-review journals between 2010 and 2017. Critical appraisal for methodological quality was conducted. Data was extracted using ad-hoc tables and qualitatively synthesized.ResultsAfter eliminating duplicates, 55 325 records remained, and 1432 records were selected for screening. Out of these, 88 full-text articles were selected for eligibility criteria, and finally, 67 studies were selected for this review, and 25 studies were selected for evidence synthesis. In total, 23 CVR assessment tools have been identified, pioneered by the Framingham study. Qualitative findings were grouped into four thematic areas: assessment tools and scores, CVR indicators, comparative models, and evidence-based recommendations.ConclusionsIt is necessary to adapt the instruments to the epidemiological reality of the population. The most appropriate way to estimate CVR is to choose the assessment tool that best suits individual conditions, accompanied by a comprehensive assessment of the patient. More research is required to determine a single, adequate, and reliable tool.