Particulate matter is linked to adverse health effects, however, little is known about health effects of particles emitted from typical indoor sources. We examined acute health effects of short‐term exposure to emissions from cooking and candles among asthmatics. In a randomized controlled double‐blinded crossover study, 36 young non‐smoking asthmatics attended three exposure sessions lasting 5 h: (a) air mixed with emissions from cooking (fine particle mass concentration): (PM2.5: 96.1 μg/m3), (b) air mixed with emissions from candles (PM2.5: 89.8 μg/m3), and c) clean filtered air (PM2.5: 5.8 μg/m3). Health effects (spirometry, fractional exhaled Nitric Oxide [FeNO], nasal volume and self‐reported symptoms) were evaluated before exposure start, then 5 and 24 h after. During exposures volatile organic compounds (VOCs), particle size distributions, number concentrations and optical properties were measured. Generally, no statistically significant changes were observed in spirometry, FeNO, or nasal volume comparing cooking and candle exposures to clean air. In males, nasal volume and FeNO decreased after exposure to cooking and candles, respectively. Participants reported additional and more pronounced symptoms during exposure to cooking and candles compared to clean air. The results indicate that emissions from cooking and candles exert mild inflammation in asthmatic males and decrease comfort among asthmatic males and females.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo estimate costs attributable to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) as compared with open prostatectomy (OP) and laparoscopic prostatectomies (LP) in a National Health Service perspective.Patients and methodsRegister-based cohort study of 4309 consecutive patients who underwent prostatectomy from 2006 to 2013 (2241 RALP, 1818 OP and 250 LP). Patients were followed from 12 months before to 12 months after prostatectomy with respect to service use in primary care (general practitioners, therapists, specialists etc) and hospitals (inpatient and outpatient activity related to prostatectomy and comorbidity). Tariffs of the activity-based remuneration system for primary care and the Diagnosis-Related Grouping case-mix system for hospital-based care were used to value service use. Costs attributable to RALP were estimated using a difference-in-difference analytical approach and adjusted for patient-level and hospital-level risk selection using multilevel regression.ResultsNo significant effect of RALP on resource-use was observed except for a marginally lower use of primary care and fewer bed days as compared with OP (not LP). The overall cost consequence of RALP was estimated at an additional €2459 (95% CI 1377 to 3540, p=0.003) as compared with OP and an additional €3860 (95% CI 559 to 7160, p=0.031) as compared with LP, mainly due to higher cost intensity during the index admissions.ConclusionsIn this study from the Danish context, the use of RALP generates a factor 1.3 additional cost when compared with OP and a factor 1.6 additional cost when compared with LP, on average, based on 12 months follow-up. The policy interpretation is that the use of robots for prostatectomy should be driven by clinical superiority and that formal effectiveness analysis is required to determine whether the current and eventual new purchasing of robot capacity is best used for prostatectomy.

Background: E-cigarette use has been shown to have short-term acute effects among active users but less is known of the acute passive effects, particularly among individuals with existing respiratory diseases. Objective: To investigate local and systemic effects of short-term passive vape exposure among patients with mild or moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: In a double-blinded crossover study 16 non-smoking COPD-patients (mean age 68) were randomly exposed for 4 h to passive vape (median PM 2.5 : 18 µg/m 3 (range: 8-333)) and clean air (PM 2.5 < 6 µg/m 3 ) separated by 14 days. Particles were measured using an ultrafine particle counter (P-TRAK) and a scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS). Health effects including Surfactant Protein-A (SP-A) and albumin in exhaled air, spirometry, FeNO, and plasma proteins were evaluated before, right after, and 24 hours after exposure. Participants reported symptoms throughout exposure sessions. Data were analyzed using mixed models. Results: SP-A in exhaled air was negatively affected by exposure to vape and several plasma proteins increased significantly. Throat irritation was more pronounced during passive vape exposure, while FVC and FEV 1 decreased, however, not significantly. Conclusions: SP-A in exhaled air and some plasma proteins were affected by passive vape in patients with COPD indicating inflammation, showing that passive vape exposure is potentially harmful.

The objective of this study is to examine the costs attributable to robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy from a broad healthcare sector perspective in a register-based longitudinal study. The population in this study were 7670 consecutive women undergoing hysterectomy between January 2006 and August 2013 in public hospitals in Denmark. The interventions in the study were total and radical hysterectomy performed robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (RALH), total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH), or open abdominal hysterectomy (OAH). Service use in the healthcare sector was evaluated 1 year before to 1 year after the surgery. Tariffs of the activity-based remuneration system and the diagnosis-related grouping case-mix system were used for valuation of primary and secondary care, respectively. Costs attributable to RALH were estimated using a difference-in-difference analytical approach and adjusted using multivariate linear regression. The main outcome measure was costs attributable to OAH, TLH, and RALH. For benign conditions RALH generated cost savings of € 2460 (95% CI 845; 4075) per patient compared to OAH and non-significant cost savings of € 1045 (95% CI -200; 2291) when compared with TLH. In cancer patients RALH generated cost savings of 3445 (95% CI 415; 6474) per patient when compared to OAH and increased costs of € 3345 (95% CI 2348; 4342) when compared to TLH. In cancer patients undergoing radical hysterectomy, RALH generated non-significant extra costs compared to OAH. Cost consequences were primarily due to differences in the use of inpatient service. There is a cost argument for using robot technology in patients with benign disease. In patients with malignant disease, the cost argument is dependent on comparator.