Hydrodynamic behavior of freshwater-saltwater mixing zone in the context of subsurface physical barriers.

The seawater intrusion (SWI) process lasts for decades in real world, thus the research on dynamic process of SWI is essential. The freshwater-saltwater mixing zone plays a crucial role in governing the groundwater movement and the solute transport in coastal aquifers. To date, there has been a lack of research on the hydrodynamic behavior of the mixing zone in the presence of subsurface physical barriers. In this work, we employed laboratory experiments and numerical simulations to investigate the dynamics of the mixing zone, comparing scenarios with and without subsurface physical barriers. The findings indicate that the construction of a subsurface physical barrier will not immediately slow down the seawater intrusion velocity and change the salinity distribution of mixing zone. The block effect of subsurface physical barriers with different heights or bottom opening sizes became apparent only when the wedge toe approached the physical barriers. The widening effect of increasing longitudinal dispersivity on the mixing zone width was more pronounced during the dynamic process compared to the steady state. Furthermore, the widening effect of increasing longitudinal dispersivity on the mixing zone was more significant compared to transverse dispersivity in both the SWI and subsurface dam scenarios throughout the intrusion process. However, in the cutoff wall scenarios, the widening effect of increasing transverse dispersivity became more obvious during the later intrusion period. Our conclusions provide a reference for the groundwater management in coastal aquifers. According to the current seawater intrusion situation, the local water bureau can predict the seawater intrusion velocity and the temporal changes of mixing zone after the construction of physical barriers.

Impacto de la formación en intervención breve. Diferencias en el abordaje hospitalario del consumo de tabaco y alcohol / Impact of a training in brief intervention. Differences in the hospital approach of tobacco and alcohol consumption

Objetivo: Evaluar el impacto de una intervención formativa para profesionales sanitarios sobre consumo de alcohol y tabaco en pacientes hospitalizados y comparar la intervención hospitalaria de dichas sustancias. Métodos: A través de dos estudios paralelos se compara, mediante cuestionarios autoadministrados, la conducta clínica declarada de 66 profesionales sanitarios frente al consumo de tabaco de sus pacientes y la intervención recibida de 169 pacientes por parte de estos profesionales, con la conducta clínica de otros 38 profesionales frente al consumo de alcohol de sus pacientes y otros 118 pacientes de diferentes unidades de hospitalización antes y después de una formación en intervención breve en tabaquismo y consumo de riesgo de alcohol respectivamente. Resultados: Se observan pocas diferencias en la conducta de los profesionales ante las dos sustancias. Los profesionales dicen prestar más ayuda en el caso del alcohol (36,4% vs 10,9% [p<0.0001]) si bien, según la intervención recibida declarada por los pacientes, no se observan estas diferencias aunque sí se les ha preguntado más por el consumo de alcohol (43,6% vs 30,8% [p<0.05]). Después de la formación no se observan cambios significativos. Discusión: En estos dos estudios, la frecuencia de intervención de los profesionales sanitarios sobre el consumo de tabaco y alcohol es baja, tanto previa como posteriormente a la formación recibida, aunque se observa una mayor detección y ayuda en el caso del alcohol. Es necesario analizar otras barreras que frenan la aplicación de los conocimientos adquiridos (AU)

Objective: To evaluate the impact of a training intervention the for health care professionals on inpatients’ smoking and alcohol consumption and to compare the hospital intervention for the two substances. Methods: Through two parallel studies, we compared, using auto-administered questionnaires, the referred clinical behaviour on smoking of 66 health care professionals and the intervention received by 169 patients, with the clinical behaviour on hazardous drinking of other 38 professionals and other 118 patients from different hospital wards before and after attending a training in brief intervention on smoking cessation and hazardous alcohol drinking respectively. Results: We only found slight differences between alcohol and tobacco concerning professionals’ behaviour. Professionals declared to assist more often patients with alcohol risk consumption than smoking (36,4% vs 10,9% [p<.0001]) although with patients those differences haven’t been confirmed. They just told to have been asked more often about alcohol consumption than about smoking (43,6% vs 30,8%[p<.05]). There were no differences after the training sessions. Discussion: Before and after training, health professionals hardly intervene in patients with alcohol or tobacco consumption even we observed higher detection and assist for alcohol risk consumption. It is necessary to examine other barriers to the application of the knowledge gained (AU)

Evaluación de un programa de formación de profesionales sanitarios sobre abordaje del tabaquismo en pacientes hospitalizados / Evaluation of a training programme for health professionals on smoking cessation in hospitalized

Introducción: La promoción del abandono del tabaco en el ámbito hospitalario es poco frecuente. Los déficit de formación constituyen una de las principales barreras. Este estudio tiene por objetivo la evaluación de los cambios producidos en relación a conocimientos, actitudes y conductas de los profesionales sanitarios tras recibir formación en intervención mínima. Sujetos y método: Se evalúa la percepción de conocimientos, actuación y status en relación al tabaquismo de 66 profesionales sanitarios antes y después de la formación. Paralelamente se compara la actuación de estos profesionales sobre una muestra de 170 pacientes antes de la formación y otros 170 después de la misma (actuación recibida según los pacientes) con el fin de corroborar la actuación autodeclarada de los profesionales. Resultados: La formación en intervención mínima aumenta significativamente el conocimiento de recursos psicológicos (en un 23,3%) y farmacológicos (en un 27,1%) de los profesionales. Sin embargo, después de la formación no se observan cambios en la medida en que: se pregunta (30,8% vs.38,2%, antes y después de la intervención respectivamente); se registra el estatus de fumador de los pacientes (73,4% vs.65,9%); se inquiere si existe deseo de dejar de fumar (25%vs. 12,5%); o se aconseja el abandono del tabaco (21,9% vs.20,8%), según la información facilitada por pacientes, y que coincide con la proporcionada por los profesionales. Conclusiones: Es necesario analizar otras barreras que frenan la aplicación de los conocimientos adquiridos

Introduction: The promotion of smoking cessation in hospital settings is uncommon. One of the main barriers to such promotion is lack of knowledge on how to proceed. The objective of this study is to assess changes in professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and actions after having received trainingin brief intervention. Participants and method: Self-perceived knowledge, actions and status in relation to smoking status were assessed in 66 healthcare professionals before and after training. Furthermore, we compared the actions carried out by these professionals with 170 inpatients before the professionals’ training and with another 170 after the training (patient’s report), to corroborate professionals’ self-reported actions. Results: Brief intervention training significantly increased professionals’ knowledge of psychological skills (by 23.3%) and of pharmacological resources (by 27.1%). Nevertheless, changes were not observed in the extent to which professionals: ask (30.8% vs. 38.2%, before and afterthe training, respectively); register patients’ smoking status (73.4% vs. 65.9%); assess willingness to quit (25% vs 12.5%); or advise patients to quit (21.9% vs. 20.8%), according to the information provided by patients, which is consistent with that provided by the professionals. Conclusions: It is necessary to examine other barriers to the application of the knowledgeg ained