Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 17(1): 34-43, 2011 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20132255

RESUMO

Rapid detection is essential for timely initiation of medical post-exposure prophylactic measures in the event of intentional release of biological threat agents. We compared real-time PCR assay performance between the Applied Biosystems 7300/7500 and the RAZOR instruments for specific detection of the causative agents of anthrax, brucellosis, tularemia and plague. Furthermore, an assay detecting Bacillus thuringiensis, a Bacillus anthracis surrogate, was developed for field-training purposes. Assay sensitivities for B. anthracis, Brucella spp., Francisella tularensis and Yersinia pestis were 10-100 fg of target DNA per reaction, and no significant difference in assay performance was observed between the instrument platforms. Specificity testing of the diagnostic panels with both instrument platforms did not reveal any cross-reactivity with other closely related bacteria. The duration of thermocycling with the RAZOR instrument was shorter, i.e. 40 min as compared with 100 min for the Applied Biosystems 7300/7500 instruments. These assays provide rapid tools for the specific detection of four biological threat agents. The detection assays, as well as the training assay for B. thuringiensis powder preparation analysis, may be utilized under field conditions and for field training, respectively.


Assuntos
Antraz/diagnóstico , Brucelose/diagnóstico , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular , Peste/diagnóstico , Tularemia/diagnóstico , Bacillus anthracis/genética , Brucella/genética , Francisella tularensis/genética , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular/instrumentação , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular/métodos , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Yersinia pestis/genética
2.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil ; 78(6): 571-7, 1997 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-9196462

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether traditional bone-setting or continuous light exercise therapy could case back pain and improve function better than ordinary physiotherapy. DESIGN: Observer-blinded, randomized clinical trial with a 6-month follow-up. SETTING: An outpatient institution for folk medicine research. PATIENTS: Of 147 back pain patients recruited from local health centers and by newspaper announcements, 132 were found eligible (non-retired-no contraindications to manipulation) and entered. A final 114 (one dropout) with back pain for longer than 7 weeks were included in this intent to treat analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Bone-setting, guidance for continuous light back movements or physiotherapy for up to ten 1-hour sessions during 6 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Spinal mobility and muscular performance. Back pain assessed by visual analog scales (VAS). RESULTS: The physical measures changed only modestly, from one tenth to half of standard deviation, while the VAS was halved. The thoracolumbar side-bending, the modified Schober, and the VAS were significantly better improved by bone-setting than by exercise but not better than by physiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Neither bone-setting nor exercise differed significantly from physiotherapy, but bone-setting improved lateral and forward bending of the spine and back pain more than did exercise.


Assuntos
Dor nas Costas/terapia , Manipulação Ortopédica , Medicina Tradicional , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Adolescente , Adulto , Instituições de Assistência Ambulatorial , Terapia por Exercício , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Método Simples-Cego
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA