Objective To Pulse oximetry saturation has been wildly used clinically.It has been reported that pulse oximetry plethysmographic waveform (POP) reflected the peripheral tissue perfusion.In this study,we parameterized POP,observed the value of POP parameters in normal adults,and established the normal reference value range.Methods A multi-center prospective descriptive study.Total of 1 019 adult volunteers with normovolemia from 7 cities were enrolled in this study.Sex,age,height,weight and pulse oximetry data in awake and spontaneous breathing under in quiet conditions in the room temperature were collected.POP parameters and perfusion index were analyzed using MATLAB 2012a software.The normal reference value ranges of POP parameters,including the amplitude of POP (Amp) and the area under the curve of POP (AUC),were formulated.Results Statistical differences of POP parameters were detected between men and women in the normal adult.The 95％ confidence reference value of POP parameters in normal population was as follows:Amp (104.8-2298.7) PVA and AUC (3265.8-6028.5) PVPGin total,Amp (129.4-2433.6) PVA and AUC (3319.0-5862.2) PVPG in male;Amp (89.5-2138.2) PVA and AUC (3163.9-5929.9) PVPG in female.Conclusions POP,including the amplitude of POP (Amp) and the area under the curve of POP (AUC),had normal reference value ranges in normal adults.

To investigate the therapeutic effect of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) on supination external rotation (SER) ankle fractures (AF) and its impact on ankle joint function and range of motion in patients.Methods:The observation group patients were treated with ORIF, while the control group patients were treated with manual reduction combined with plaster external fixation. Both groups of patients were followed up after 3 and 6 months of treatment. Compare the ankle joint function levels of two groups of patients before treatment and after 3 and 6 months of treatment (Kofood score, AOFAS score, Olerud Molander subjective ankle score (OMAS)). Compare the joint range of motion (relative peak force, torque acceleration energy, endurance) between two groups of patients after 3 and 6 months of treatment. Compare the clinical indicators and incidence of adverse events between two groups of patients after 6 months of treatment. T-test was used for comparison between two groups. Multiple group comparisons were conducted using analysis of variance, while pairwise comparisons were conducted using Dunnett-t test. Comparison of count data between groups using χ2 inspections or Fisher exact test. Results:Before treatment, there was no statistically significant difference in the Kofoed score, AOFAS score, and OMAS score between the two groups of patients (all P>0.05). The Kofoed scores of patients in the observation group before treatment and at 3 and 6 months of treatment were (53.78±6.40), (76.73±4.12), and (89.07±5.78) points, respectively. The control group was (52.22±7.08), (71.68±4.82), and (84.05±5.45) points, respectively. The Kofoed scores of patients in both groups were higher than before treatment at 3 and 6 months of treatment (all P<0.05), and the observation group was higher than the control group (all P<0.01).The AOFAS scores of patients in the observation group before treatment and at 3 and 6 months of treatment were (70.13±5.39), (81.62±4.25), and (92.05±4.15) points, respectively. The control group was (69.85±5.41), (79.08±4.60), and (88.92±4.43) points, respectively. The AOFAS scores of patients in both groups were higher than before treatment at 3 and 6 months of treatment (all P<0.05), and the observation group was significantly higher than the control group (all P<0.01).The OMAS scores of the observation group patients before treatment and at 3 and 6 months of treatment were (53.43±5.07), (76.14±4.52), and (85.68±4.14) points, respectively. The control group was (54.42±4.86), (71.39±3.94), and (81.78±4.15) points, respectively. The OMAS scores of the two groups of patients at 3 and 6 months of treatment were higher than before treatment (all P<0.05), and the observation group was higher than the control group (all P<0.01). The fracture healing time (38.85±4.50) days and complete weight-bearing time (66.62±7.14) days of the observation group patients were shorter than those of the control group patients (49.42±5.43) days and (74.39±6.75) days, and the differences between the two groups were statistically significant (t-values were 12.89 and 6.80, respectively, all P<0.01); There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups of patients (5.41% (4/74) and 9.46% (7/74)), χ2=0.88, P=0.347). Conclusion:ORIF has a good therapeutic effect on SER-AF patients, promotes ankle joint function recovery, and has a low incidence of adverse events, indicating good safety.

Objective To prepare Compound Nanxing Pain Relief Gel(CNPRG)and evaluate its quality and sensitization.Methods CNPRG uses Carbopol 980 NF as the matrix;Appearance,viscosity,coating,centrifugal stability,cold stability,thermal stability as comprehensive indicators,single test and Box-Behnken effector method to optimize the prescription;The quality evaluation methods of appearance,pH,viscosity,stability,vapor phase identification of volatile components,and determination of diaconitine and eugenol content of CNPRG were preliminarily established;CNPRG sensitization was assessed by Active Cutaneous Anaphylaxis.Results The best prescription for CNPRG was Carbopol 980 NF 0.35 g,drug 1.02 g,glycerol 5.00 g,and pH 6.20.CNPRG ′s appearance likes jelly,is smooth,uniform and delicate;pH=6.20±0.03;viscosity 68.43±1.14 Pa·s;Centrifugation,high,low temperature stability,no stratification and precipitation;Identify camphor,(±)-Borneol and(±)-Isoborneol,Cinnamaldehyde,eugenol,phenol;Hypaconitine content 0.2983±0.0073 μg·g-1;Eugenol content 155.66±0.97 μg·g-1;CNPRG confirmed no sensitization.Conclusion CNPRG has good appearance,stable quality and no sensitization,and it can provide a choice for the development of new dosage forms of compound Nanxing pain relief cream to alleviate sensitization.

Objective To assess and compare the incidence,clinical characteristics,treatment,and prognosis of acute heart failure patients from different grades hospitals in Beijing.Methods In this prospective internet prognosis registered study (Beijing AHF Registry),a total of 3 335 consecutive patients admitted to 14 emergency departments in Beijing from January 1st 2011 to September 23rd 2012 were enrolled.According to hospital grade,these patients were divided into two groups,349 patients were from secondary hospitals,and 2 956 patients were from tertiary hospitals.Results Among the 3 335 patients,the medium age was 71 (58,79) years,and male accounted for 53.16％.The most common underlying disease were coronary disease (43.27％),hypertension (17.73％),cardiomyopathy (16.07％) etc.The average treatment time in Emergency Department was 66.82 h.The emergency department mortality rate was 3.81％ (127 cases).The 30-day and 1-year cumulative all-cause mortality were 15.3％ and 32.27％,respectively.The 30-day and 1-year cumulative all-cause readmission were 15.64％ and 46.89％,respectively.Compared with patients in tertiary hospitals,patients in secondary hospitals had more onset acute heart failure patients (63.64％ vs.49.93％),shorter emergency department treatment time (12 h vs.41 h),lower discharge rate (3.43％ vs.37.45％) and emergency department mortality(1.58％ vs.4.09％).Compared with those in tertiary hospitals,1-year cumulative all-cause mortality (25.6％ vs.33.2％),cardiovascular disease mortality (20.2％ vs.26.0％),aggravated heart failure mortality (22.4％ vs.28.8％) were lower in secondary hospitals.Following propensity score matching,compared to tertiary hospitals,patients in secondary hospitals showed lower utilization rate of beta-blockers and ACEFARB (4.51％ vs.28.17％,1.41％ vs.9.58％),except the pironolactone.Conclusion Acute heart failure in emergency department is associated with a high mortality rate and readmission rate.There is still a big gap between guidelines recommend medication current treatments for acute heart failure.