The Arizona Solar Center (AzSC) was established in 1999 to increase public and professional understanding of solar energy, especially as it pertains to Arizona. Currently registered with the IRS as a 501(c)(6) non-profit organization, the Center is administered by a Board of Directors with a wide range of experience and training in solar energy and other renewable energy resources. Sponsors include utility companies, other related non-profit organizations and a number of private companies. This wide representation enables the Center to remain largely neutral with respect to policy and legislation in Arizona.Some aims of the Center include aggregating core information about solar energy in Arizona, providing updates about the Arizona solar energy community, identifying available resources, services and equipment, and highlighting developments in solar and related industries. Many of these functions are carried out through its website.The Center and its website are widely referenced as a primary source for many topics relating to solar in Arizona. The website's articles on solar architecture and solar thermal technology are especially unique and commonly referenced outside of Arizona as well..
Background Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly used in the management of patients with multiple sclerosis to understand the patient's perspective of disease and treatment. These measures provide insights into important factors including treatment satisfaction, physical and psychological function, and quality of life. Objective To present results from the real-world PRO-ACT study in patients with multiple sclerosis who switched to alemtuzumab from another disease-modifying therapy. Methods This 24-month, prospective, multicenter, observational study had a primary endpoint of change in overall satisfaction, measured using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) version 1.4. Secondary endpoints included the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29), Modified Fatigue Impact Scale-5 (MFIS-5), and the Patient-Determined Disease Steps (PDDS). Safety was monitored with adverse events (AEs). Results Of 199 enrolled patients, improvements were observed in mean TSQM scores for overall satisfaction (baseline, 50.3; year 2, + 13.2; p < 0.0001), effectiveness (49.3 and + 12.2; p < 0.0001), and side effects (77.6 and + 4.5; p = 0.04). Improvements were also observed in MSIS-29 physical (52.4 and −6.0; p < 0.0001), MSIS-29 psychological (53.4 and −7.0; p = 0.0003), and MFIS-5 (12.8 and −1.7; p < 0.0001). Most (95.0%) patients experienced ≥ 1 AE (88.4% mild, 67.8% moderate). Conclusions The primary endpoint was met; the safety of alemtuzumab was consistent with pivotal studies.
Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) refers to partial or complete occlusion of one or more non-coronary arteries that leads to compromised blood flow and ischemia. Numerous processes are involved in arterial stenosis, however, atherosclerosis remains the most common etiology. PAD constitutes a major health economic problem, and it is estimated that over 200 million people around the world suffer from PAD, with at least 20% having some degree of claudication. The purpose of this review is to compare and contrast the guidelines on PAD published in 2005, 2011 and 2016 in terms of new recommendations and level of evidence for practicing clinicians.
Objectives:1) Obtain measures of six current bone conduction devices that use a surgically implanted osseointegrated post (Baha Intenso, Baha BP100, Baha BP110, Ponto, Ponto Pro) or a non‐surgical module on the teeth (SoundBite). 2) Describe how the measures relate to auditory performance.Methods:Compare measures of the six devices on the same laboratory system using identical standards (ANSI, IEC). Outcome Measurements: Maximum vibratory output, maximum gain, linear dynamic range, and frequency range. Independent Variables: Six devices.Results:Measures for all devices were highly repeatable (sd of test‐retest measures < 0.5 dB) and equivalent to available published results. Maximum output, gain, and linear dynamic range at full‐on gain settings were similar for all devices but differed by frequency region. For the frequency range necessary for processing speech (500‐2000 Hz), all of the devices have sufficient output, gain, and linear dynamic range. For the frequency range optimal for providing the spatial hearing benefits of understanding speech in noise and speech localization (1500‐8000 Hz), the dental device will have 10‐20 dB more gain and linear dynamic range than the implantable devices.Conclusions:All devices had sufficient output, gain, and linear dynamic range to reach a normal cochlea over a frequency range to provide benefit for processing speech. The dental device has a higher output and larger dynamic range (~20 dB) in the high frequency range (>2000 Hz) that relates to spatial hearing benefits.
We compared the effectiveness of 2 surgical interventions for improving word recognition ability in a quiet environment among patients who presented with: (1) bilateral, precipitously sloping, high-frequency hearing loss; (2) relatively good auditory thresholds at and below 500 Hz, and (3) poor speech recognition. In 1 intervention (n = 25), a conventional electrode array was inserted into 1 cochlea. As a consequence, hearing was lost in the implanted ear. In the other intervention (n = 22), a Nucleus Hybrid short-electrode array was inserted 10 mm into 1 cochlea with the aim of preserving hearing in that ear. Both groups of patients had similar low-frequency hearing and speech understanding in the ear contralateral to the implant. Following surgery, both groups had significantly higher word recognition scores than before surgery. Between-group comparisons indicated that the conventional electrode array group had higher word recognition scores than the 10-mm group when stimulation was presented to the operated ear and when stimulation was presented to both ears.
