Literatura científica selecionada sobre o tema "Verona High School (Verona, Ohio)"

The aim of this school-based study was to identify the possible association between diet and physical activity, as well as the anthropometric, vascular, and gluco-lipid parameters. We administered two validated questionnaires for diet and physical activity (Food Frequency questionnaire (FFQ), Children-Physical Activity Questionnaire (PAQ-C)) to children at four primary schools in Verona South (Verona, Italy). Specific food intake, dietary pattern, and physical activity level expressed in Metabolic Equivalent of Task (MET) and PAQ-C score were inserted in multivariate linear regression models to assess the association with anthropometric, hemodynamic, and gluco-lipid measures. Out of 309 children included in the study, 300 (age: 8.6 ± 0.7 years, male: 50%; Obese (OB): 13.6%; High blood pressure (HBP): 21.6%) compiled to the FFQ. From this, two dietary patterns were identified: “healthy” and “unhealthy”. Direct associations were found between (i) “fast food” intake, Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV), and (ii) animal-derived fat and capillary cholesterol, while inverse associations were found between vegetable, fruit, and nut intake and capillary glucose. The high prevalence of OB and HBP and the significant correlations between some categories of food and metabolic and vascular parameters suggest the importance of life-style modification politics at an early age to prevent the onset of overt cardiovascular risk factors in childhood.

Abstract Background Over the past few years, the phenomenon of “nursing student attrition” has been unevenly studied. Investigators often focused on independent predictors as age, family obligations, final grade of high school, demanding physical and mental workload and others. Specifically, just a few studies applied qualitative methods to better comprehend the very needs of first year students enrolled in a bachelor’s degree in nursing sciences (BSN), to sustain their learning process and define effective strategies to reduce student drop-out. Methods We conducted a qualitative descriptive study. Thirty-one nursing students at Verona University were interviewed using a semi-structured guide. Data analysis was performed according to a descriptive approach by Sandelowski & Barroso (2000). Results A total number of 31 students were interviewed. The most recurrent themes regarding the reasons behind BSN drop-out were: understanding that they were not suited to be nurses, perception of missing/lack of psychological, physical and practical resources needed to successfully cope with both nursing school and the nursing profession, inconsistencies between the image of the profession and the reality of the job, feelings of disappointment for the experiences of internship, perceived lack of support from the clinical teacher while going through difficult experiences. Conclusions We can consider a part of these drop-out decisions normal, even physiological when students come to realise that they are not suited for the nursing profession. However, it’s important to guide nursing students with adequate counselling in order to give them the essential tools to cope with the training and the future as health professionals.

Abstract Background Implementation of control programmes for Strongyloides stercoralis infection is among the targets of the World Health Organization Roadmap to 2030. Aim of this work was to evaluate the possible impact in terms of economic resources and health status of two different strategies of preventive chemotherapy (PC) compared to the current situation (strategy A, no PC): administration of ivermectin to school-age children (SAC) and adults (strategy B) versus ivermectin to SAC only (strategy C). Methods The study was conducted at the IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria hospital, Negrar di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy, at the University of Florence, Italy, and at the WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, from May 2020 to April 2021. Data for the model were extracted from literature. A mathematical model was developed in Microsoft Excel to assess the impact of strategies B and C in a standard population of 1 million subjects living in a strongyloidiasis endemic area. In a case base scenario, 15% prevalence of strongyloidiasis was considered; the 3 strategies were then evaluated at different thresholds of prevalence, ranging from 5 to 20%. The results were reported as number of infected subjects, deaths, costs, and Incremental-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). A 1-year and a 10-year horizons were considered. Results In the case base scenario, cases of infections would reduce dramatically in the first year of implementation of PC with both strategy B and C: from 172 500 cases to 77 040 following strategy B and 146 700 following strategy C. The additional cost per recovered person was United States Dollar (USD) 2.83 and USD 1.13 in strategy B and C, respectively, compared to no treatment in the first year. For both strategies, there was a downtrend in costs per recovered person with increasing prevalence. The number of adverted deaths was larger for strategy B than C, but cost to advert one death was lower for strategy C than B. Conclusions This analysis permits to estimate the impact of two PC strategies for the control of strongyloidiasis in terms of costs and adverted infections/deaths. This could represent a basis on which each endemic country can evaluate which strategy can be implemented, based on available funds and national health priorities.

PrologueGlaucoma surgery has been, for many decades now, dominated by the universal gold standard which is trabeculectomy augmented with antimetabolites. Tubes also came into the scene to complement what we use to call conventional or traditional glaucoma surgery. More recently we experienced a changing glaucoma surgery environment with the “advent” of what we have become used to calling Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery (MIGS). What is the unmet need, what is the gap that these newcomers aim to fill?Hippocrates taught us “bring benefit, not harm” and new glaucoma techniques and devices aim to provide safer surgery compared to conventional surgery. For the patient, but also for the clinician, safety is important. Is more safety achieved with new glaucoma surgery and, if so, is it associated with better, equivalent, or worse efficacy? Is new glaucoma surgery intended to replace conventional surgery or to complement it as an ‘add-on’ to what clinicians already have in their hands to manage glaucoma? Which surgery should be chosen for which patient? What are the options? Are they equivalent? These are too many questions for the clinician! What are the answers to the questions? What is the evidence to support answers? Do we need more evidence and how can we produce high-quality evidence? This EGS Guide explores the changing and challenging glaucoma surgery environment aiming to provide answers to these questions.The EGS uses four words to highlight a continuum: Innovation, Education, Communication, and Implementation. Translating innovation to successful implementation is crucially important and requires high-quality evidence to ensure steps forward to a positive impact on health care when it comes to implementation.The vision of EGS is to provide the best possible well-being and minimal glaucomainduced visual disability in individuals with glaucoma within an affordable healthcare system. In this regard, assessing the changes in glaucoma surgery is a pivotal contribution to better care. As mentioned, this Guide aims to provide answers to the crucial questions above. However, every clinician is aware that answers may differ for every person: an individualised approach is needed. Therefore, there will be no uniform answer for all situations and all patients. Clinicians would need, through the clinical method and possibly some algorithm, to reach answers and decisions at the individual level. In this regard, evidence is needed to support clinicians to make decisions. Of key importance in this Guide is to provide an overview of existing evidence on glaucoma surgery and specifically on recent innovations and novel devices, but also to set standards in surgical design and reporting for future studies on glaucoma surgical innovation. Designing studies in surgery is particularly challenging because of many subtle variations inherent to surgery and hence multiple factors involved in the outcome, but even more because one needs to define carefully outcomes relevant to the research question but also to the future translation into clinical practice. In addition this Guide aims to provide clinical recommendations on novel procedures already in use when insufficient evidence exists.EGS has a long tradition to provide guidance to the ophthalmic community in Europe and worldwide through the EGS Guidelines (now in their 5th Edition). The EGS leadership recognized that the changing environment in glaucoma surgery currently represents a major challenge for the clinician, needing specific guidance. Therefore, the decision was made to issue this Guide on Glaucoma Surgery in order to help clinicians to make appropriate decisions for their patients and also to provide the framework and guidance for researchers to improve the quality of evidence in future studies. Ultimately this Guide will support better Glaucoma Care in accordance with EGS’s Vision and Mission.Fotis TopouzisEGS PresidentContributorsAll contributors have provided the appropriate COI visible in detail atwww.eugs.org/pages/guidesurgical/This manuscript reflects the work and thoughts of the list of individuals recognized above, but importantly, it reflects EGS views on the subject matter. Its strength originates from a team effort, where a cohesive group of authors and reviewers have worked towards a common goal and now stand behind the text in its entirety. The EGS nevertheless wishes to thank the following external contributors for their additional expertise, which was particularly valuable to the development of this Surgical Guide: Amanda Bicket, Jonathan Bonnar, Catey Bunce, Kuan Hu, Sheffinea Koshy, Jimmy Le, Tianjing Li, Francisco Otarola, Riaz Qureshi, Anupa Shah, Richard Stead and Marta Toth. A particular appreciation goes to Ian Saldanha for drafting the introductory overview on Core Outcomes on chapter 8. Finally, EGS would like to acknowledge Augusto Azuara Blanco, Chair of the Scientific and Guidelines Committee, for his expertise and advisory role throughout the entire process.Luis Abegao PintoEditorGordana Sunaric MégevandEditorIngeborg StalmansEditorLuis Abegao Pinto, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Lisboa NorteHana Abouzeid, Clinical Eye Research Centre Adolph de Rothschild, AZ OphthalmologieEleftherios Anastasopoulos, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Papageorgiou Hospital, Thessaloniki, GreeceAugusto Azuara Blanco, Centre for Public Health, Queen’s University BelfastLuca Bagnasco, Clinica Oculistica, DiNOGMI University of GenoaAlessandro Bagnis, Clinica Oculistica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San MartinoJoao Barbosa Breda, Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. Centro Hospitalar e Universitário São João, Porto, Portugal. KULeuven, BelgiumKeith Barton, University College London, Moorfields Eye HospitalAmanda Bicket, University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI, USA)Jonathan Bonnar, Belfast Health and Social Care TrustChiara Bonzano, Clinica Oculistica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San MartinoRupert Bourne, Cambridge University HospitalAlain Bron, University Hospital DijonCatey Bunce, King’s College LondonCarlo Cutolo, Clinica Oculistica, DiNOGMI University of Genoa, and IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San MartinoBarbara Cvenkel, University Medical Centre Ljubljana Faculty of Medicine, University of LjubljanaAntonio Fea, University of TurinTheodoros Filippopoulos, Athens Vision Eye InstitutePanayiota Founti, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation TrustStefano Gandolfi, U.O.C. Oculistica, University of ParmaJulian Garcia Feijoo, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, Universidad Complutense, MadridGerhard Garhoefer, Medical University of Vienna, AustriaDavid Garway Heath, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London. Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London.Gus Gazzard, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London. Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London.Stylianos Georgoulas, Addenbrooke’s, Cambridge University HospitalsDimitrios Giannoulis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AHEPA Hospital, Thessaloniki, GreeceFranz Grehn, University Hospitals WuerzburgKuang Hu, NIHR Moorfields Biomedical Research Centre, London – Institute of Ophthalmology – University College LondonMichele Iester, Clinica Oculistica, DiNOGMI University of Genoa, and IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San MartinoHari Jayaram, Moorfields Eye HospitalGauti Johannesson, Umea UniversityStylianos Kandarakis, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, G. Gennimatas Hospital, Athens, Greece.Efthymios Karmiris, Hellenic Air Force General Hospital & National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, G. Gennimatas Hospital, AthensAlan Kastner, Clinica Oftalmologica Pasteur, Santiago, ChileAndreas Katsanos, University of Ioannina, GreeceChristina Keskini, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AHEPA HospitalAnthony Khawaja, Moorfields Eye Hospital and UCL Institute of OphthalmologyAnthony King, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustJames Kirwan, Portsmouth hospitals university NHS trustMiriam Kolko, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen University Hospital RigshospitaletSheffinea Koshy, University of GalwayAntoine Labbe, Quinze-Vingts ­National Ophthalmology HospitalJimmy Le, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, BaltimoreSanna Leinonen, Tays Eye Centre, Tampere University HospitalSophie Lemmens, University Hospitals UZ LeuvenTianjing Li, School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical CampusGiorgio Marchini, Clinica Oculistica, University Hospital, AOUI, Verona, ItalyJosé Martinez De La Casa, Hospital Clinico San Carlos. Universidad ComplutenseAndy McNaught, Gloucestershire Eye UnitFrances Meier Gibbons, Eye Center Rapperswil, SwitzerlandKarl Mercieca, University Hospitals Eye Clinic, Bonn, GermanyManuele Michelessi, IRCCS – Fondazione BiettiStefano Miglior, University of Milan BicoccaEleni Nikita, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation TrustFrancesco Oddone, IRCCS ­Fondazione BiettiFrancisco Otarola, Universidad de La FronteraMarta Pazos, Institute of Ophthalmology. Hospital Clínic Barcelona. Researcher at Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS)Norbert Pfeiffer, Mainz University Medical CenterVerena Prokosh, University of Cologne, Center for ophthalmology.Riaz Qureshi, Johns Hopkins Medicine, BaltimoreGokulan Ratnarajan, Queen Victoria Hospital, East Grinstead, UKHerbert Reitsamer, University Clinic Salzburg / SALKLuca Rossetti, University of Milan, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, Milano, ItalyIan Saldanha, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, BaltimoreCedric Schweitzer, CHU Bordeaux, Univ. Bordeaux, ISPED, INSERM, U1219 – Bordeaux Population Health Research Centre, FranceAndrew Scott, Moorfields Eye Hospital LondonRiccardo Scotto, Clinica Oculistica, DiNOGMI University of GenoaAnupa Shah, Queen’s University BelfastGeorge Spaeth, Wills Eye Hospital/Sidney Kimmel Medical College/Thomas Jefferson UniversityIngeborg Stalmans, University Hospitals UZ Leuven, Catholic University KU LeuvenRichard Stead,Nottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustFrancesco Stringa, University Hospital Southampton NHS FTGordana Sunaric, Centre Ophtalmologique de Florissant, Centre de Recherche Clinique en Ophtalmologie Mémorial Adolphe de RothschildAndrew Tatham, University of Edinburgh, Princess Alexandra Eye PavilionMark Toeteberg, University Hospital ZurichFotis Topouzis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AHEPA HospitalMarta Toth, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation TrustCarlo Traverso, Clinica Oculistica, DiNOGMI University of Genoa, and IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San MartinoAnja Tuulonen, Tays Eye Centre, Tampere University HospitalClemens Vass, Medical University of ViennaAnanth Viswanathan, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHSFT and UCL Institute of OphthalmologyRichard Wormald, UCL Institute of OphthalmologyExternal ReviewersAmerican Glaucoma SocietyAsia-Pacific Glaucoma SocietyMiddle East Africa Glaucoma SocietyWorld Glaucoma Societywww.eugs.org/pages/externalreviewersThe team of Clinica Oculistica of the University of Genoa for medical editing and illustrationLuca BagnascoAlessandro BagnisChiara BonzanoCarlo CutoloMichele IesterRiccardo ScottoCarlo Traverso