1.The effect of β-adrenoceptor blockers on G protein and heart function in rats with acute myocardial infarction
Rongsheng XIE ; Lu FU ; Junxian CAO ; Yingnan DAI ; Liqun ZHU ; Ying HAN
Chinese Journal of Geriatrics 2009;28(8):692-695
ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of β-adrenoceptor (β-AR) blockers on G protein and heart function changes in rats with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) MethodsWistar rats with AMI induced by left anterior descending coronary branch ligation were randomly divided into compared with sham operation group. Eight weeks after therapy, hemodynamics was assessed by inserting catheters and the level of G protein was detected by Western blot analysis. ResultsCompared with the sham operation group, systolic blood pressure(SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), left ventricular systolic pressure(LVSP) and left ventrieular pressure maximal rate of rise and fall(±dp/dtmax) in AMI group were significantly decreased, while left ventricular end diastolic pressure (LVEDP) and Gs and Gi protein levels were significantly increased (all P<0.05). Compared with AMI group, LVSP and ± dp/dtmax were increased, but LVEDP and Gi protein level were significantly decreased in metoprolol and carvedilol group. LVEDP and Gi protein level were decreased in carvedilol group compared with metoprolol group. ConclusionsCarvedilol can effectively suppress the change of G protein and improve the heart function after AMI, and the effect is better than that of metoprolol. This may be related with its β2-AR blocking effect.
2. A comprehensive evaluation of intervention effects on workplace health promotion in 10 government agencies
Yingnan JIA ; Junling GAO ; Junming DAI ; Pinpin ZHENG ; Zhongyang LI ; Guangyao LI ; Hua FU
Chinese Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases 2018;36(4):251-253
Objective:
To evaluate the comprehensive workplace health promotion intervention effects on workplace health promotion in 10 government agencies.
Methods:
A prospective self-controlled design was employed. Baseline evaluation and effectiveness evaluation were both conducted by questionnaire investigation.
Results:
The intervention results showed that most effectiveness indicators were significantly improved including health behaviors, psychosocial work environment, and health status. After the intervention, the prevalence of passive smoking and physical inactivity decreased from 70.3% and 38.7% to 44.1% and 30.5%, respectively. The scores of job control and social support at work increased by 0.30 and 0.05, respectively. The prevalence of good self-rated health and good mental health raised from 68.3% and 68.8% to 75.6% and 85.6%, respectively. However, the scores of job demand increased by 0.4. Furthermore, the prevalence of occupational stress increased significantly from 45.8% to 65.5%.
Conclusion
After implementing workplace health promotion, the physical and mental health of the staff have been promoted. However, the occupational stress of government officials still need to be improved.