-
The Science of the Total Environment Jun 2019Human exposure to man-made Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) has increased to unprecedented levels, accompanied by increase in various health problems. A connection has been... (Review)
Review
Human exposure to man-made Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) has increased to unprecedented levels, accompanied by increase in various health problems. A connection has been indicated by an increasing number of studies. Symptoms characterized as Electro-hyper-sensitivity (EHS) are frequently reported especially in urban environments. Lately, people are advised by private companies and individuals to protect themselves from man-made EMFs by metal shielding through various products, for which there are reasonable concerns about their protective efficacy and safety. Indeed, any metal shielding practice, even when correctly applied, attenuates not only man-made totally polarized EMFs accused for the health problems, but also the natural non-polarized EMFs responsible for the biological rhythmicity and well-being of all animals. Strong evidence on this was provided by pioneering experiments in the 1960's and 1970's, with volunteers staying in a shielded underground apartment. We analyze the physical principles of EMF-shielding, the importance of natural atmospheric EMFs, and examine available shielding methods and suggested products, relying on science-based evidence. We suggest that an avoidance strategy is safer than shielding, and provide specific protection tips. We do not reject shielding in general, but describe ways to keep it at a minimum by intermittent use, as this is theoretically safer than extensive permanent shielding. We explain why metallic patches or "chips" or minerals claimed by sellers to be protective, do not seem to make sense and might even be risky. We finally suggest urgent research on the safety and efficacy of shielding methods combined with use of generators emitting weak pulses of similar frequency, intensity, and waveform with the natural atmospheric resonances.
Topics: Electromagnetic Fields; Environmental Exposure; Humans; Protective Devices; Radiation Protection
PubMed: 30831365
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.344 -
Techniques in Vascular and... Mar 2018Many interventionalists face physical challenges almost daily for years or decades. The burden of assuming awkward positions while carrying extra weight can take its... (Review)
Review
Many interventionalists face physical challenges almost daily for years or decades. The burden of assuming awkward positions while carrying extra weight can take its toll on the musculoskeletal system to such an extent that the career is ended or modified to exclude procedural aspects. The proliferation of lighter aprons has unfortunately resulted in reduced protection with poor correlation of protection to labeling due to the inadequacies of testing methods for nonlead materials. The protective quality of the non-leads is not superior to lead-containing composites on a weight basis, and the user no longer knows how well they are protected unless buying aprons containing lead. Various useful methods and shields that may reduce radiation exposure are supported by the floor, ceiling, table, or patient. The suspended personal radiation protection system is a recent development which provides substantially greater radiation protection than conventional lead aprons combined with other shields, while also taking all of the weight off of the operator. It is composed of an expansive and thick (1mm Pb equiv) apron with a large face-shield to protect the neck, head, and eyes, and is suspended overhead to provide motion in the x, y, and z planes. Exposures may also be substantially reduced by leaving the area during acquisition sequences and use of power injectors.
Topics: Equipment Design; Humans; Job Description; Lead; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Occupational Health; Occupational Injuries; Posture; Protective Clothing; Protective Factors; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Exposure; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Protection; Radiologists; Radiology, Interventional; Risk Factors; Workforce
PubMed: 29472000
DOI: 10.1053/j.tvir.2017.12.003 -
Formal Methods in System Design 2017is an approach to enforce safety properties at runtime. A shield monitors the system and corrects any erroneous output values instantaneously. The shield deviates from...
is an approach to enforce safety properties at runtime. A shield monitors the system and corrects any erroneous output values instantaneously. The shield deviates from the given outputs as little as it can and recovers to hand back control to the system as soon as possible. In the first part of this paper, we consider shield synthesis for reactive hardware systems. First, we define a general framework for solving the shield synthesis problem. Second, we discuss two concrete shield synthesis methods that automatically construct shields from a set of properties: (1) shields, which guarantee recovery in a finite time. (2) shields, which attempt to work with the system to recover as soon as possible. Next, we discuss an extension of -stabilizing and admissible shields, where erroneous output values of the reactive system are corrected while liveness properties of the system are preserved. Finally, we give experimental results for both synthesis methods. In the second part of the paper, we consider shielding a human operator instead of shielding a reactive system: the outputs to be corrected are not initiated by a system but by a human operator who works with an autonomous system. The challenge here lies in giving simple and intuitive explanations to the human for any interferences of the shield. We present results involving mission planning for unmanned aerial vehicles.
PubMed: 32009740
DOI: 10.1007/s10703-017-0276-9 -
Radiologic Technology Nov 2023To explore the data and supporting evidence for the 2019 statement by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) that recommends limits to the routine use... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To explore the data and supporting evidence for the 2019 statement by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) that recommends limits to the routine use of fetal and gonadal shielding in medical imaging.
METHODS
Three researchers searched 5 online databases, selecting articles from scholarly journals and radiology trade publications. Search results were filtered to include literature published from January 1, 2016, to August 9, 2022, to ensure relevance and provide historical background for the 2019 AAPM statement.
RESULTS
The use of patient shielding during medical imaging did not reduce dose, and in certain instances, increased dose received by patients during computed tomography, fluoroscopy, or dental imaging. The use of shielding interfered with technology designed to reduce patient dose, including automatic exposure control and dose modulation. Research showed that errors in shield placement were common and that shields can act as sources of infection or carriers of harmful lead dust.
DISCUSSION
In each article reviewed, a compelling case was made for discontinuing routine patient shielding during radiographic procedures. Serious opposition to the discontinuation of the shielding practice was not found. Opportunities exist for further study into technologists' and the public's understanding of the effects of radiation and technologists' compliance with new shielding policies.
CONCLUSION
The challenges with properly using shielding, paired with recent technological advancements and a new understanding of radiation protection, have negated the need for contact shielding. This legacy practice can be discontinued in clinical settings, and educational materials for technologists and students should be updated to reflect these changes.
Topics: Humans; Radiation Dosage; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Radiation Protection; Fluoroscopy; Protective Devices
PubMed: 37940176
DOI: No ID Found -
Frontiers in Public Health 2015A nipple shield is a breastfeeding aid with a nipple-shaped shield that is positioned over the nipple and areola prior to nursing. Nipple shields are usually recommended... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
A nipple shield is a breastfeeding aid with a nipple-shaped shield that is positioned over the nipple and areola prior to nursing. Nipple shields are usually recommended to mothers with flat nipples or in cases in which there is a failure of the baby to effectively latch onto the breast within the first 2 days postpartum. The use of nipple shields is a controversial topic in the field of lactation. Its use has been an issue in the clinical literature since some older studies discovered reduced breast milk transfer when using nipple shields, while more recent studies reported successful breastfeeding outcomes. The purpose of this review was to examine the evidence and outcomes associated with nipple shield use.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, OLDMEDLINE, EMBASE Classic, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL. The primary endpoint was any breastfeeding outcome following nipple shield use. Secondary endpoints included the reasons for nipple shield use and the average/median length of use. For the analysis, we examined the effect of nipple shield use on physiological responses, premature infants, mothers' experiences, and health professionals' experiences.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 261 articles, 14 of which were included in this review. Of these 14 articles, three reported on physiological responses, two reported on premature infants, eight reported on mothers' experiences, and one reported on health professionals' experiences.
CONCLUSION
Through examining the use of nipple shields, further insight is provided on the advantages and disadvantages of this practice, thus allowing clinicians and researchers to address improvements on areas that will benefit mothers and infants the most.
PubMed: 26528467
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00236 -
Nature Communications Aug 2022Force and strain sensors made of soft materials enable robots to interact intelligently with their surroundings. Capacitive sensing is widely adopted thanks to its low...
Force and strain sensors made of soft materials enable robots to interact intelligently with their surroundings. Capacitive sensing is widely adopted thanks to its low power consumption, fast response, and facile fabrication. Capacitive sensors are, however, susceptible to electromagnetic interference and proximity effects and thus require electrical shielding. Shielding has not been previously implemented in soft capacitive sensors due to the parasitic capacitance between the shield and sensing electrodes, which changes when the sensor is deformed. We address this crucial challenge by patterning the central sensing elastomer layer to control its compressibility. One design uses an ultrasoft silicone foam, and the other includes microchannels filled with liquid metal and air. The force resolution is sub-mN both in normal and shear directions, yet the sensor withstands large forces (>20 N), demonstrating a wide dynamic range. Performance is unaffected by nearby high DC and AC electric fields and even electric sparks.
PubMed: 35945227
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-32391-0 -
American Journal of Ophthalmology Oct 2020To evaluate the efficacy of slit lamp breath shields to prevent droplet spray from a simulated sneeze. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy of slit lamp breath shields to prevent droplet spray from a simulated sneeze.
DESIGN
Experimental study to test the effectiveness of personal protective equipment.
METHODS
The nozzle of a spray gun was adjusted to angularly disperse a mist of colored dye that approximated a patient sneezing on a dimensionally accurate cardboard slit lamp model. The designs of 6 commercially available breath shields and 1 breath shield repurposed from a plastic container lid were tested. Each breath shield was sprayed in a standardized fashion 3 times, and the amount of overspray was compared to spray with no shield and quantified. The surface area that was sprayed was calculated using a commercially available software with color range function. The average percentage of overspray of each breath shield was computed in comparison to the control.
RESULTS
The breath shields ranged in surface area from 116 to 924 cm, and the amount of overspray varied from 54% to virtually none. Larger breath shields offered better protection than smaller ones. Breath shields attached to the objective lens arm were better barriers than those of comparable size hung by the oculars. A repurposed plastic lid breath shield, 513 cm, was slightly curved toward the examiner's face and allowed only 2% overspray. The largest breath shield (924 cm) hung near the oculars and prevented essentially all overspray.
CONCLUSIONS
The performance of different designs of breath shields was variable. Even high-functioning shields should be used in conjunction with personal protective equipment including masks, goggles, and gloves and handwashing. Ideally patients should also wear a face mask during all slit lamp examinations.
Topics: Aerosols; Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Equipment Design; Humans; Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional; Inhalation Exposure; Models, Theoretical; Pandemics; Personal Protective Equipment; Pneumonia, Viral; SARS-CoV-2; Slit Lamp Microscopy; Sneezing; Video Recording
PubMed: 32407727
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.05.005 -
Attention, Perception & Psychophysics Jan 2024Magnetoencephalography (MEG) can measure brain activity in ms-level temporal resolution. MEG sensors are super sensitive devices for magnetic signals of the brain but...
Magnetoencephalography (MEG) can measure brain activity in ms-level temporal resolution. MEG sensors are super sensitive devices for magnetic signals of the brain but are also prone to electromagnetic interferences. The MEG device is located inside the magnetically shielded room (MSR), and any monitoring device used inside the MSR requires special shielding and its location must be carefully selected to suppress electromagnetic interference. Eye-tracker measures eye movements, providing spatial location of the gaze, pupil diameters, and eye blinks. Eye tracking in MEG enables, for example, categorization of the MEG data based on gaze position and interactive stimulus using gaze position. Combining the methods together will require considering the electromagnetic interference for the MEG-that is, additional shielding, positioning of the eye tracker, and subject-specific issues related to make-up and eye-corrective lenses.
PubMed: 38291204
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-024-02847-0 -
Expert Review of Medical Devices Sep 2018Decreasing radiation exposure of the cardiac catheterization laboratory staff is critical for minimizing radiation-related adverse outcomes and can be accomplished by... (Review)
Review
Decreasing radiation exposure of the cardiac catheterization laboratory staff is critical for minimizing radiation-related adverse outcomes and can be accomplished by decreasing patient dose and by shielding. Areas covered: protection from ionizing radiation can be achieved with architectural, equipment-mounted, and disposable shields, as well as with personal protective equipment. Expert commentary: Radiation protective aprons are the most commonly used personal protective equipment and provide robust radiation protection but can cause musculoskeletal strain. Use of a thyroid collar is recommended, as is use of 'shin guards', lead glasses and radioprotective caps, although the efficacy of the latter is being debated. Alternatives to lead aprons include shielding suspended from the ceiling and robotic percutaneous coronary intervention. Radiation protective gloves and cream can be used to protect the hands, but the best protection is to not directly expose them to the radiation beam. Devices that provide real time operator radiation dose monitoring can enable real time adjustments in positioning and shield placement, reducing radiation dose. Shielding can be achieved with architectural, equipment-mounted, and disposable shields. Equipment-mounted shielding includes ceiling-suspended shields, table-suspended drapes, and radioabsorbent drapes. Personal protective equipment and shielding should be consistently and judiciously utilized by all catheterization laboratory personnel.
Topics: Catheterization; Humans; Occupational Exposure; Protective Devices; Radiation Exposure; Radiation Monitoring; Radiation Protection
PubMed: 30092660
DOI: 10.1080/17434440.2018.1510771 -
BMJ Open Quality May 2021Ophthalmologists were concerned about the risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission via droplets given the close proximity to the patient during slit lamp examination. There is a...
Ophthalmologists were concerned about the risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission via droplets given the close proximity to the patient during slit lamp examination. There is a need to design a simple, low-cost, waterproof breath shield to minimise risk of infection.Dimensions of the Haag-Streit slit lamp (model BM 900) were recorded to guide accurate design of the breath shield. A questionnaire was circulated among slit lamp users on their perceived risk and concern about SARS-CoV-2 transmission and their perception of how effective different designs of breath shields would be at protecting them from an infection. A number of breath shield prototypes were designed and trialled. Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) cycles were used to improve the design. Materials used to create the breath shields included transparent A3 laminating pouches and laminator, two sheets of A4 paper, scissors, hole punch and a ruler. The breath shield was designed to fit over the objective lens on the slit lamp after temporarily removing the standard, manufacturer-provided breath shield, before replacing it. The breath shields were cleaned after every patient with alcohol wipes and removed for deep cleaning with hand soap and water after each session. We used a proof of concept experiment using fluorescein instilled spray to test the effectiveness of each breath shield at preventing droplet transmission to the slit lamp user.Following four PDSA cycles, a breath shield that is user-friendly, easy to clean was produced. The percentage of confidence that the final design would be effective at preventing droplet transmission increased from 5.6% to 80%.Implementation of a low cost, simple to make, transparent, waterproof breath shield together with other forms of person protective equipment (PPE) creates a safe working environment for clinicians and patients. This intervention can be readily replicated and modified for other slit lamp models.
Topics: COVID-19; Disease Transmission, Infectious; Equipment Design; Humans; Protective Devices; SARS-CoV-2; Slit Lamp; Slit Lamp Microscopy
PubMed: 34035129
DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2021-001361