The processing of sediment to accurately characterize the spatially-resolved depth profiles of geophysical and geochemical properties along with signatures of microbial density and activity remains a challenge especially in complex contaminated areas. This study processed cores from two sediment boreholes from background and contaminated core sediments and surrounding groundwater. Fresh core sediments were compared by depth to capture the changes in sediment structure, sediment minerals, biomass, and pore water geochemistry in terms of major and trace elements including pollutants, cations, anions, and organic acids. Soil porewater samples were matched to groundwater level, flow rate, and preferential flows and compared to homogenized groundwater-only samples from neighboring monitoring wells. Groundwater analysis of nearby wells only revealed high sulfate and nitrate concentrations while the same analysis using sediment pore water samples with depth was able to suggest areas high in sulfate- and nitrate-reducing bacteria based on their decreased concentration and production of reduced by-products that could not be seen in the groundwater samples. Positive correlations among porewater content, total organic carbon, trace metals and clay minerals revealed a more complicated relationship among contaminant, sediment texture, groundwater table, and biomass. The fluctuating capillary interface had high concentrations of Fe and Mn-oxides combined with trace elements including U, Th, Sr, Ba, Cu, and Co. This suggests the mobility of potentially hazardous elements, sediment structure, and biogeochemical factors are all linked together to impact microbial communities, emphasizing that solid interfaces play an important role in determining the abundance of bacteria in the sediments.
Background: Researchers have assessed postoperative injury or disability predictors in the military setting but typically focused on 1 type of surgical procedure at a time, used relatively small sample sizes, or investigated mixed cohorts with civilian populations. Purpose: To identify the relationship between baseline variables and injury incidence or military discharge status in US Army soldiers after knee surgery. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were obtained from a repository containing personnel, performance, and medical records for all active-duty US Army soldiers. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to estimate the effects of numerous variables on postoperative injury or on medical discharge. Variable selection and model validation were conducted using the k-fold method. Results: A total of 7567 soldiers underwent knee surgery between 2017 and 2019. Meniscal procedures were the most common type of surgery (39%), and approximately 71% of the cohort had a postoperative injury. Significant predictors for sustaining a postoperative injury included having a previous nonknee injury (odds ratio [OR], 1.5), female sex (OR, 1.3), and Black race (OR, 1.2). Within 4 years after surgery, 17% of soldiers were discharged from the military because of knee-related disability. Significant predictors for discharge from duty included enlisted rank (OR, 2.3), recent fitness test failure (OR, 1.9), number of previous knee surgeries (OR, 1.7), and having a previous nonknee injury (OR, 1.6). Conclusion: After knee surgery, nearly three-fourths of the soldiers in this cohort sustained a postoperative injury and almost one-fifth of soldiers were medically discharged from the military within 4 years. This study identified variables that indicate statistically increased risk for these postoperative outcomes and highlighted potentially modifiable factors.
Soldiers must be able to perform a multitude of physically demanding tasks as part of their regular duty, but their physical readiness is often degraded due to pain and musculoskeletal injury (MSKI). The presence of pain with movement has been associated with increased MSKI risk in Soldiers. Improved awareness of the prevalence of painful movements in uninjured Soldiers could help inform Army injury mitigation efforts. The purpose of this study was to identify the prevalence of pain with movement in a population of healthy active duty Soldiers.
In the United Kingdom, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to the cessation of elective surgery. However, there remains a need to provide urgent and emergency cardiac and thoracic surgery as well as to continue time-critical thoracic cancer surgery. This study describes our early experience of implementing a protocol to safely deliver major cardiac and thoracic surgery in the midst of the pandemic.Data on all patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery at a single tertiary referral center in London were prospectively collated during the first 7 weeks of lockdown in the United Kingdom. A comprehensive protocol was implemented to maintain a COVID-19-free environment including the preoperative screening of all patients, the use of full personal protective equipment in areas with aerosol-generating procedures, and separate treatment pathways for patients with and without the virus.A total of 156 patients underwent major cardiac and thoracic surgery over the study period. Operative mortality was 9% in the cardiac patients and 1.4% in thoracic patients. The preoperative COVID-19 protocol implemented resulted in 18 patients testing positive for COVID-19 infection and 13 patients having their surgery delayed. No patients who were negative for COVID-19 infection on preoperative screening tested positive postoperatively. However, 1 thoracic patient tested positive on intraoperative bronchoalveolar lavage.Our early experience demonstrates that it is possible to perform major cardiac and thoracic surgery with low operative mortality and zero development of postoperative COVID-19 infection.
Hearing aid verification with real-ear measurement (REM) is recommended in clinical practice. Improvements, over time, in accuracy of manufacturers' initial fit mean the benefit of routine REM for new adult users is unclear. This registered, double-blinded, randomized, mixed-methods clinical trial aimed to (i) determine whether new adult hearing aid users prefer initial or real-ear fit and (ii) investigate the reasons for preferences. New adult hearing aid users (n = 45) were each fitted with two programs: the initial fit and real-ear fit, both with adjustments based on immediate feedback from the patient. Participants were asked to complete daily paired-comparisons of the two programs with a magnitude estimation of the preference, one for each of clarity/comfort in quiet/noise as well as overall preference. The results revealed gain adjustment requests were low in number and small in magnitude. Deviation from NAL-NL2 targets (after adjustment for a 65 dB SPL input) was close to zero, except at high frequencies where real-ear fits were around 3 dB closer to target. There was no difference in clarity ratings between programs, but comfort ratings favored initial fit. Overall, 10 participants (22%) expressed a preference for real-ear fit. Reasons for preference were primarily based on comfort with the initial fit and clarity with real-ear fit. It may be acceptable to fit new adult users with mild-to-moderate hearing loss without the need for REMs, if the primary outcome of interest is user preference. It remains to be seen if the findings generalize to other fitting software, other outcome measures and more severe hearing loss.
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)