scholarly journals Erkinis encefalitas: studentų požiūrio ir turimų žinių analizė

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (76) ◽  
pp. 118-122
Author(s):  
R. Mineikytė ◽  
G. Navickaitė ◽  
J. Valaikienė
Keyword(s):  

Įvadas. Nustatyta, kad sergamumas erkiniu encefalitu (EE) Lietuvoje 2016 m. padvigubėjo ir yra vienas didžiausių Europoje. Šio tyrimo tikslas išsiaiškinti ir įvertinti I–IV kursų medicinos studentų požiūrį ir žinias apie EE sergamumą Lietuvoje, riziką susirgti, komplikacijas, gydymą, naudojamas prevencijos priemones ir informacijos apie erkių platinamų ligų sklaidą. Tiriamieji ir tyrimo metodai. Atlikta anoniminė anketinė apklausa, kurioje dalyvavo 404 studentai, besimokantys Vilniaus universiteto Medicinos fakulteto I–IV kursuose (amžius vid. – 20,7 ± 1,56 m., 17–30 m.) Anketą sudarė 21 pusiau uždaras klausimas: 6 klausimai apie EE sergamumą, komplikacijas ir gydymą, 9 klausimai apie erkių platinamų ligų prevencines priemones ir 2 klausimai apie informacijos šaltinius ir sklaidą. Rezultatai. EE, kaip erkių platinamą ligą, įvardijo 397 (98,3 %), Laimo boreliozę (LB) – 382 (94,6 %) respondentai. Kad sergamumas EE Lietuvoje didelis (> 11/100 tūkst. gyv. per metus), žinojo 58 (14,4 %) studentai, 159 (39,4 %) atsakė, kad vidutinis (2–10/100 tūkst. gyv. per metus). Dažniausios įvardintos EE komplikacijos buvo paralyžius, parezė – 327 (80,9 %). Efektyviausia prevencine priemone 237 (58,7 %) studentai įvardijo skiepus. Pasiskiepijusių nuo EE buvo 169 (41,8 %). Teigiančių, kad galimas tik simptominis gydymas, buvo 106 (26 %). 113 (28,0 %) studentų nuomone, žmonės apie erkių platinamas ligas yra pakankamai informuoti, o 193 (47,8 %) manė, kad dėmesio skiriama per mažai. 219 (54 %) studentų pagrindiniu šaltiniu apie EE įvardijo žiniasklaidą. Išvados. Tik 14,4 % studentų žinojo, kad sergamumas EE Lietuvoje yra didelis, o ne vidutinis. Beveik visi sutiko, kad EE sukelia ilgalaikių komplikacijų, bet tik kas ketvirtas žinojo, kad gydymas yra tik simptominis. Dauguma studentų atsakė, kad vakcinacija yra efektyviausia prevencijos priemonė, beveik pusė respondentų nurodė, kad yra pasiskiepiję nuo EE. Kas antras studentas teigė, kad visuomenė nėra pakankamai informuota apie erkių platinamas ligas.

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Z Gurtin

Abstract Study question How did patients experience the delays and disruptions to their fertility treatment that occurred as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and resulting clinic closures? Summary answer Patients reported feeling ‘powerless/helpless’ (78.3%), ‘frustrated’ (59.3%), and ‘anxious’ (54.7%), and detailed why clinic closures were experienced as a devastating double disruption. What is known already Fertility patients found clinic closures and the disruption to their treatments stressful due to uncertainty and perceived threats to their goal of parenthood, and experienced an increase in anxiety and depression. However, paper goes far beyond the mostly quantitative data that has been published by analysing patients’ detailed qualitative accounts of their feelings and experiences in their own words. Study design, size, duration A mixed-methods, anonymous, online questionnaire in English was live for 6 weeks between 19 May to 30 June 2020. All patients aged over 18, whose fertility treatment or investigations had been impacted by the coronavirus pandemic were eligible to take part. The questionnaire was widely distributed using mainstream media, social media, and the mailing lists of relevant organisations. In total 709 people began and 501 completed the questionnaire in the time available (70.7% completion rate). Participants/materials, setting, methods The questionnaire included ten parts with a mixture of quantitative and qualitative items. The responses of 457 female fertility patients who were resident in the UK were analysed. The average age was 34.6 (SD = 4.9). The majority were in a heterosexual relationship (91.0%), white (90.6%), and had no children (87.1%). Descriptive and inferential statistics were used on quantitative data, and thematic analysis used for qualitative data. Main results and the role of chance Using insights from the sociology of reproduction, including how patients face and resolve “disruption” (Becker 1997), this paper presents qualitative accounts from fertility patients regarding their feelings, reactions and experiences regarding the Covid-19 pandemic and the resulting clinic closures. Respondents highlighted the intensity of their feelings, noting that their lives seemed “paused”, “stopped” or “thrown into a state of limbo”, leaving them unable to move forward with crucial life plans. Moreover, many explained that clinics closures were not experienced simply as a disruption, but rather as an additional hurdle in what had already been a series of difficult disruptions to normalcy, including, in many cases, an unforeseen inability to conceive naturally, long waiting lists for fertility treatment, and treatment delays due to economic or other factors. The major themes to emerge from respondents’ accounts were: lack of control; lack of support; and feelings of difference, isolation and being left out. In many ways, the Covid-19 related disruptions exacerbated and added to fertility patients’ existing anxieties and frustrations. One respondent wrote, “IVF is one of the most stressful things you can go through. To then be in the middle of that during a global pandemic it makes it even more stressful.” Limitations, reasons for caution Participants were self-selecting and reporting their feelings and reactions at one particular point in time. Only responses from 457 UK-residents were included in the analyses. Wider implications of the findings These findings show that patients attending fertility clinics need additional support and care during times of uncertainty and disruption, and that many regard their treatment as an essential medical service. We encourage governments and regulators to keep fertility clinics open whenever it is possible to safely do so. Trial registration number Not applicable


1995 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dagmar Henschel ◽  
Armand Blaschette ◽  
Peter G. Jones

Complexes of Uncharged Molecules, Crystal StructureThe thermally labile ternary complexes 18C6 · 2MeOH · 2 HN(SO2Ph)2 (2a), 18C6 · 2MeOH · 2HN(SO2–C6H4-4-Cl)2 (2b) and 18C6 · 3 MeOH · HN(SO2Me)(SO2Ph) (3) were obtained by co-crystallization of 18-crown-6 (18C6) and the appropriate di(organosulfonyl)amine from methanolic solutions and characterized by low-temperature X-ray diffraction. The crystal structures of 2a (monoclinic, space group P21/n) and 2b (triclinic, space group P1̄) consist of monomeric, centrosymmetric formula units. Each di(arenesulfonyl)-amine molecule is connected to a methanol molecule by an N-Η ··· O hydrogen bond (H ··· O 203 pm in 2a, 190 pm in 2b). The methanol molecules are linked to three alternate crown oxygen atoms via one O-Η ··· O(crown) hydrogen-bond and two weaker C-Η ··· O(crown) interactions (OH ··· O 201 pm in 2a, 186 pm in 2b; CH ··· O 236 and 247 pm in 2a, 240 and 254 pm in 2b); two symmetry-related oxygen atoms of the crown are involved in O-Η ··· O and the other four in C-Η ··· O interactions. The structure of complex 3 (monoclinic, space group P21) is built of infinite chains parallel to [101]. The methyl group of the di(organosulfonyl)amine is bonded by C-Η ··· O(crown) interactions to a set of three alternate oxygen atoms of the cyclic polyether (H ··· O 228, 245 and 247 pm). Starting from the acidic NH function, a sequence of three methanol molecules catenated by hydrogen bonds curves around the bulky phenyl group and links with its terminal MeOH through one O-H ··· O(crown) and two C-Η ··· O(crown) bonds to the second set of alternate oxygen atoms in the adjacent symmetry-equivalent crown (OH ··· O 193 pm, CH ··· O 248 and 250 pm). Within the chain sequence N-H ··· O′(Me)H′ ··· O″(Me)H″ ··· O‴(Me)H, the H ··· O distances are H ··· O′ 184, H′ ··· O″ 189 and H″··· O‴ 183 pm. In the structures of 2a, 2b and 3, the crown rings adopt the frequently observed D3d pseudosymmetry.


2008 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. S49
Author(s):  
H.I. Canter ◽  
I. Vargel ◽  
M. Emin Mavili

2006 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. S58
Author(s):  
G. Di Liberto ◽  
A. Roque-Afonso ◽  
G. Fallot ◽  
P. Marcellin ◽  
C. Féray

2006 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
E. Verbo ◽  
S. Perfiliev ◽  
A. Nerobeyev ◽  
N. Rabuchina

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document