Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

G Fowler

Publications and source records attributed to G Fowler.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

Assessment of the risk of introduction of Anoplophora glabripennis (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in municipal solid waste from the quarantine area of New York City to landfills outside of the quarantine area: a pathway analysis of the risk of spread and establishment.

The risk associated with spread of Asian longhorned beetle, Anoplophora glabripennis (Motschulsky), from infested areas in New York City to the wide array of landfills across the eastern United States contracted by the city since 1997 was unknown, but of great concern. Landfills, some as far as South Carolina, Virginia, and Ohio, occupied forest types and climates at high risk of Asian longhorned beetle establishment. The city proposed a separate waste wood collection known as the "311 System;" this was estimated to cost federal and state agencies $6.1 to $9.1 million per year, including the cost of processing and disposal of the wood. Pathway analysis was used to quantify the probability that Asian longhorned beetle present in wood waste collected at curbside would survive transport, compaction, and burial to form a mated pair. The study found that in seven alternate management scenarios, risks with most pathways are very low, especially given existing mitigations. Mitigations included chemical control, removal of infested trees, and burial of wood waste in managed landfills that involved multiple-layering, compaction, and capping of dumped waste with a 15-cm soil cover at the end of each day. Although the risk of business-as-usual collection and disposal practices was virtually nil, any changes of policy or practice such as illegal dumping or disposal at a single landfill increased the risk many thousandfold. By rigorously maintaining and monitoring existing mitigations, it was estimated that taxpayers would save $75 to $122 million dollars over the next decade.

Animals↗
PubMed2004

Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is to replace nicotine from cigarettes. This reduces withdrawal symptoms associated with smoking cessation thus helping resist the urge to smoke cigarettes. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this review were:to determine the effectiveness of the different forms of NRT (chewing gum, transdermal patches, nasal spray, inhalers and tablets) in achieving abstinence from cigarettes, or a sustained reduction in amount smoked; to determine whether the effect is influenced by the clinical setting in which the smoker is recruited and treated, the dosage and form of the NRT used, or the intensity of additional advice and support offered to the smoker; to determine whether combinations of NRT are more effective than one type alone; to determine its effectiveness compared to other pharmacotherapies. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register in March 2004. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized trials in which NRT was compared to placebo or to no treatment, or where different doses of NRT were compared. We excluded trials which did not report cessation rates, and those with follow up of less than six months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data in duplicate on the type of participants, the dose, duration and form of nicotine therapy, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. For each study we calculated summary odds ratios. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 123 trials; 103 contributing to the primary comparison between NRT and a placebo or non-NRT control group. The odds ratio (OR) for abstinence with NRT compared to control was 1.77 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.66 to 1.88). The ORs for the different forms of NRT were 1.66 (95% CI: 1.52 to 1.81) for gum, 1.81 (95% CI: 1.63 to 2.02) for patches, 2.35 (95% CI: 1.63 to 3.38) for nasal spray, 2.14 (95% CI: 1.44 to 3.18) for inhaled nicotine and 2.05 (95% CI: 1.62 to 2.59) for nicotine sublingual tablet/lozenge. These odds were largely independent of the duration of therapy, the intensity of additional support provided or the setting in which the NRT was offered. In highly dependent smokers there was a significant benefit of 4 mg gum compared with 2 mg gum (OR 2.20, 95% CI: 1.85 to 3.25). There was weak evidence that combinations of forms of NRT are more effective. Higher doses of nicotine patch may produce small increases in quit rates. Only one study directly compared NRT to another pharmacotherapy. In this study quit rates with bupropion were higher than with nicotine patch or placebo. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: All of the commercially available forms of NRT (gum, transdermal patch, nasal spray, inhaler and sublingual tablets/lozenges) are effective as part of a strategy to promote smoking cessation. They increase the odds of quitting approximately 1.5 to 2 fold regardless of setting. The effectiveness of NRT appears to be largely independent of the intensity of additional support provided to the smoker. Provision of more intense levels of support, although beneficial in facilitating the likelihood of quitting, is not essential to the success of NRT.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed2000

Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is to replace nicotine from cigarettes. This reduces withdrawal symptoms associated with smoking cessation to help resist the urge to smoke cigarettes. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this review were to determine the effectiveness of the different forms of nicotine replacement therapy (chewing gum, transdermal patches, nasal spray, inhalers and tablets) in achieving abstinence from cigarettes; to determine whether the effect is influenced by the clinical setting in which the smoker is recruited and treated, the dosage and form of the NRT used, or the intensity of additional advice and support offered to the smoker; and to determine whether combinations of NRT are more effective than one type alone. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized trials in which NRT was compared to placebo or no treatment, or where different doses of NRT were compared. We excluded trials which did not report cessation rates, and those with follow-up of less than six months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data in duplicate on the type of subjects, the dose and duration and form of nicotine therapy, the outcome measures, method of randomisation, and completeness of follow-up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed effects model. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 49 trials of nicotine gum, 32 of transdermal nicotine patch, four of intranasal nicotine spray, four of inhaled nicotine and two of nicotine sublingual tablet. Three trials compared combinations of two forms of nicotine therapy with one form alone. The odds ratio for abstinence with NRT compared to control was 1.72 (95% confidence interval 1.60 to 1.84), The odds ratios for the different forms of NRT were 1.63 for gum, 1.77 for patches, 2.27 for nasal spray, 2.08 for inhaled nicotine and 1.73 for nicotine sublingual tablet. These odds were largely independent of the intensity of additional support provided or the setting in which the NRT was offered. Eight weeks of patch therapy was as effective as longer courses and there was no evidence that tapered therapy was better than abrupt withdrawal. Wearing the patch only during waking hours (16 hours/day) was as effective as wearing it for 24 hours/day. The odds ratio for abstinence in the trials which directly compared 4 mg versus 2 mg gum in highly dependent smokers found a significant benefit in favour of 4 mg gum (odds ratio 2.67, 95% confidence interval 1.69 to 4.22). There is no strong evidence that combinations of forms of NRT are more effective. Only one study directly compared NRT against another pharmacotherapy (bupropion) and found that the latter was significantly more effective either alone or used in combination with nicotine patch than if nicotine patch was used alone. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: All of the commercially available forms of NRT (nicotine gum, transdermal patch, and in some countries, the nicotine nasal spray, nicotine inhaler and nicotine sublingual tablets) are effective as part of a strategy to promote smoking cessation. They increase quit rates approximately 1.5 to 2 fold regardless of setting. The effectiveness of NRT appears to be largely independent of the intensity of additional support provided to the smoker. Since all the trials of NRT reported so far have included at least some form of brief advice to the smoker, this represents the minimum which should be offered in order to ensure its effectiveness. Provision of more intense levels of support, although beneficial in facilitating the likelihood of quitting, is not essential to the success of NRT. There is promising evidence that bupropion may be more effective than NRT (either alone or in combination). (ABSTRACT

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed2000

Training health professionals in smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: There is good evidence that brief interventions from health professionals can increase rates of smoking cessation. A number of trials have examined whether specific skills training for health professionals leads them to have greater success in helping their patients who smoke. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of training health care professionals to deliver smoking cessation interventions to their patients, and to assess the additional effects of prompts and reminders to the health professional to intervene. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register for studies relating to training. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials in which the intervention was training of health care professionals in smoking cessation. Trials were considered if they reported outcomes for patient smoking rates at least six months after the intervention. We reported on process outcomes, but we excluded trials that reported effects only on process outcomes and not smoking behaviour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data in duplicate on the type of health professionals, the nature of and duration of the training, the outcome measures, method of randomisation, and completeness of follow-up. The main outcome measures were 1. Rates of abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up in patients smoking at baseline. 2. Rates of performance of tasks of smoking cessation by health care professionals including offering counselling, setting quit dates, giving follow-up appointments, distributing self-help materials and recommending nicotine gum. MAIN RESULTS: Healthcare professionals who had received training were more likely to perform tasks of smoking cessation than untrained controls. Of eight studies that compared patient smoking behaviour between trained professionals and controls, six found no effect of intervention. The effects of training on process outcomes increased if prompts and reminders were used. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Training health professionals to provide smoking cessation interventions had a measurable effect on professional performance. There was no strong evidence that it changed smoking behaviour.

Health Personnel↗
PubMed1999

Randomized trial of nurse-assisted strategies for smoking cessation in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Brief advice to stop smoking from general practitioners (GPs) has been repeatedly shown to increase smoking cessation by a small, but measurable amount. Some studies have suggested that adding more intensive interventions to brief advice may increase its effectiveness, but it is unclear whether this is true in general practice. AIMS: To determine whether brief advice from a doctor together with counselling and follow-up from a trained practice nurse is more effective than brief advice alone in helping people to stop smoking. METHODS: The design was a randomized controlled trial. Four hundred and ninety-seven general practice patients aged older than 18 years and smoking at least one cigarette per day in six general practices in Oxfordshire, Berkshire, and Buckinghamshire were randomized to one of two interventions: brief verbal or written advice from a GP plus extended counselling and follow-up from a trained practice nurse; brief advice from a GP alone. The primary outcome was sustained abstinence from smoking at three and 12 months. A secondary outcome was forward movement in the stages of change cycle. RESULTS: The proportion showing sustained abstinence was 3.6% in the extended counselling group, and 4.4% in the brief advice group (difference = -0.8%; 95% confidence interval = -4.3% to 2.6%). Seventy-four (30%) of those randomized to extended counselling actually took up this offer. No significant progression in stages of change was detected between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In unselected general practice patients who smoke, brief advice from a GP combined with intensive intervention and follow-up by a practice nurse is no more effective than brief advice alone.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1999

An assessment of the efficacy of atorvastatin in achieving LDL cholesterol target levels in patients with coronary heart disease: a general practice study.

Adherence to evidence-based guidelines for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) has been shown to be poor in a number of surveys. In this open-label, non-comparative 17-week trial, 399 patients with existing CHD and LDL cholesterol concentration > 3.4 mmol/l (130 mg/dl) were treated with atorvastatin 10 mg daily. After 5 weeks, the dose of atorvastatin was adjusted according to a patient's LDL cholesterol level. Of the 379 patients remaining in the study after five weeks of treatment, dose titration was not required for 355 patients (94%) who had reached the target LDL cholesterol of < or = 3.4 mmol/l. Of the 23 patients titrated to higher doses, 11 achieved the target LDL cholesterol after treatment for 17 weeks. Atorvastatin was well tolerated during the course of the study. Achieving LDL cholesterol targets without the need for dose titration simplifies clinical management and should encourage better adherence to evidence-based recommendations for secondary prevention of CHD.

Anticholesteremic Agents↗
PubMed1998

Rod influence on hue-scaling functions.

Rod influence on hue appearance of spectral lights was characterized by comparing the scaling of red, green, yellow, and blue hue sensations for an 8 degrees-diameter, 7 degrees-eccentric test spot under conditions that minimized (cone plateau) and maximized (dark adapted) rod influence at two mesopic light levels (1.5 and 3.0 log scoptic trolands). At the lower light level, the hue-scaling functions showed that rod signals influenced the spectral range and magnitude of all four primary hues. The rod influence could not be characterized as a ubiquitous augmentation or diminution of any hue over the entire spectrum. This constrains models of rod influence on color vision.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Differences between amlodipine and lisinopril in control of clinic and twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressures.

The anti-hypertensive efficacy of once-daily amlodipine (up to 10 mg) and lisinopril (up to 20 mg) were compared in terms of clinic and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control, in an observer-blind, two-period crossover study. Following a 4-week placebo run-in period, patients underwent two active treatment phases each lasting 12 weeks and separated by a 4-week washout period. Sixty patients with a supine diastolic BP between 90 and 120 mm Hg were included, irrespective of whether or not they had received previous anti-hypertensive medication. Amlodipine reduced supine systolic and diastolic clinic BP significantly more than lisinopril (-20+/-2/-14+/-1 vs -11 3/-7+/-1 mm Hg; P=0.02/ P=0.001) 24 h post-dose. Clinic standing diastolic BP was also significantly reduced with amlodipine compared with lisinopril (P=0.05). Both drugs produced control of mean ambulatory BP relative to baseline over 24 h. Amlodipine showed more consistent control of BP over the 24-h period in contrast to lisinopril which exerted its greatest effect during the daytime.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Omeprazole may exert both a bacteriostatic and a bacteriocidal effect on the growth of Helicobacter pylori (NCTC 11637) in vitro by inhibiting bacterial urease activity.

AIMS: To assess the potential antibacterial effect of omeprazole, a benzimidazole proton pump inhibitor, on the growth of Helicobacter pylori in vitro and to evaluate the effect of this compound on bacterial urease activity. METHODS: The growth of H pylori was observed in liquid culture in the presence and absence of omeprazole (0.8 mg/ml). Urease activity was evaluated in aliquots removed from two hour cultures by monitoring the initial change in absorbency at 560 nm in the presence of 0.02% phenol red. RESULTS: The minimum inhibitory concentration of omeprazole against H pylori was 0.8 mg/ml. The concentration of omeprazole required to inhibit growth was dependent on inoculum density: omeprazole (0.8 mg/ml) prevented growth from a 1 x 10(6) cfu/ml inoculum, but not from the higher inocula of 10(7) or 10(8) cfu/ml. This is the first study to demonstrate that omeprazole exerts a bacteriocidal effect against low bacterial densities and a bacteriostatic effect when bacterial density is high. When used at the onset of growth, this concentration of omeprazole has a bacteriocidal effect after four hours, although it exerts a bacteriostatic effect when added to cultures after the exponential phase. Bacterial urease activity is competitively inhibited by omeprazole in a dose dependent manner. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that omeprazole exerts both a bacteriocidal and a bacteriostatic effect against H pylori and competitively inhibits bacterial extracellular urease activity.

Anti-Ulcer Agents↗