Hatfielddominguez2857

The hippocampus rapidly forms associations among ongoing events as they unfold and later instructs the gradual stabilisation of their memory traces in the neocortex. Although this two-stage model of memory consolidation has gained substantial empirical support, parallel evidence from rodent studies suggests that the neocortex, in particular the medial prefrontal cortex, might work in concert with the hippocampus during the encoding of new experiences. This opinion article first summarises findings from behavioural, electrophysiological, and molecular studies in rodents that uncovered immediate changes in synaptic connectivity and neural selectivity in the medial prefrontal cortex during and shortly after novel experiences. Based on these findings, I then propose a model positing that the medial prefrontal cortex and hippocampus might use different strategies to encode information during novel experiences, leading to the parallel formation of complementary memory traces in the two regions. The hippocampus captures moment-to-moment changes in incoming inputs with accurate spatial and temporal contexts, whereas the medial prefrontal cortex may sort the inputs based on their similarity and integrates them over time. MeclofenamateSodium These processes of pattern recognition and integration enable the medial prefrontal cortex to, in real time, capture the central content of novel experience and emit relevancy signal that helps to enhance the contrast between the relevant and incidental features of the experience. This hypothesis serves as a framework for future investigations on the potential top-down modulation that the medial prefrontal cortex may exert over the hippocampus to enable the selective, perhaps more intelligent encoding of new information.

Emergency general surgery (EGS) conditions encompass a variety of diseases treated by acute care surgeons. The heterogeneity of these diseases limits infrastructure to facilitate EGS-specific quality improvement (QI) and research. A uniform anatomic severity grading system for EGS conditions was recently developed to fill this need. We integrated this system into our clinical workflow and examined its impact on research, surgical training, communication, and patient care.

The grading system was integrated into our clinical workflow in a phased fashion through formal education and a written handbook. A documentation template was also deployed in our electronic medical record to prospectively assign severity scores at the time of patient evaluation. Mixed methods including a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews of trainees and attending surgeons were used to evaluate the impact of the new workflow and to identify obstacles to its adoption.

We identified 2291 patients presenting with EGS conditiom and the clinical workflow that uses it.

Level III.

Level III.

The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of existing literature on simulation-based training of cataract surgery. Available literature was evaluated and projections on how current findings could be applied to cataract surgery training were summarised. The quality of included literature was also assessed.

The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles pertaining to simulation training in cataract surgery on 18 November 2019. Selected articles were qualitatively analysed.

A total of 165 articles were identified out of which 10 met inclusion criteria. Four studies reported construct validity of the EyeSi simulator. Six studies demonstrated improved surgical outcomes corresponding to training on the simulator. Quality assessment of included studies was satisfactory.

Current studies on simulation training in cataract surgery all point towards it being an effective training tool with low risk of study biases confounding this conclusion. As technology improves, surgical training must embrace and incorporate simulation technology in training.

Current studies on simulation training in cataract surgery all point towards it being an effective training tool with low risk of study biases confounding this conclusion. As technology improves, surgical training must embrace and incorporate simulation technology in training.

Microbial keratitis is a sight-threatening complication of contact lens wear, which affects thousands of patients and causes a significant burden on healthcare services. This study aims to identify compliance with contact lens care recommendations and identify personal hygiene risk factors in patients who develop contact lens-related microbial keratitis.

A case-control study was conducted at the University Hospital Southampton Eye Casualty from October to December 2015. Two participant groups were recruited cases were contact lens wearers presenting with microbial keratitis and controls were contact lens wearers without infection. Participants underwent face-to-face interviews to identify lens wear practices, including lens type, hours of wear, personal hygiene and sleeping and showering in lenses. Univariate and multivariate regression models were used to compare groups.

37 cases and 41 controls were identified. Showering in contact lenses was identified as the greatest risk factor (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.2 to 8.5; p=0.03), with showering daily in lenses compared with never, increasing the risk of microbial keratitis by over seven times (OR, 7.1; 95% CI, 2.1 to 24.6; p=0.002). Other risks included sleeping in lenses (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1 to 8.6; p=0.026), and being aged 25-39 (OR, 6.38; 95% CI, 1.56 to 26.10; p=0.010) and 40-54 (OR, 4.00; 95% CI 0.96 to 16.61; p=0.056).

The greatest personal hygiene risk factor for contact lens-related microbial keratitis was showering while wearing lenses, with an OR of 3.1, which increased to 7.1 if patients showered daily in lenses. The OR for sleeping in lenses was 3.1, and the most at-risk age group was 25-54.

The greatest personal hygiene risk factor for contact lens-related microbial keratitis was showering while wearing lenses, with an OR of 3.1, which increased to 7.1 if patients showered daily in lenses. The OR for sleeping in lenses was 3.1, and the most at-risk age group was 25-54.