Wednesday, 15 April 2015

Geriatric Essay


Healthcare needs of the seniors or aging population are increasing day by day; fortunately, a number of reforms are also advancing and serving as an important role in fulfilling those needs.   As people grow older, several health problems begin to surface, even impacting their independence. At present acute illnesses and delirium represent one of the biggest challenges to the elderly people (Layard, 2004). A delirious individual has a perplexed link to the environment, and the perplexity waxes and wanes. With less care this can irrevocably alter the lives of ageing inhabitants across the world. Eldercare often needs a multi-disciplinary approach that includes various aspects, for example, healthcare, finances, activities of daily living, emotional and social well being (WHO, 2012). However, most of the time older patients with delirium or any other illnesses do not desire to stay at a nursing home or a hospital.  Thus, they cannot be forced to stay there. Luckily, for such patients, much can be done to keep them out of hospital, rehab centers or nursing homes and also to help them live healthy retaining their independence. Furthermore, a stigma is often associated with delirium and other mental health issues (Corrigan et al., 2001). It can mentally classify a person by others in an unwanted, redundant stereotype rather than in a normal, accepted stereotype.  The older age is also disparaged and stigmatized plus regarded to be a time of greater dependence and helplessness (Nelson and Todd, 2004).
While consideration of mental health professionals are needed to plan and offer better health care in the treatment of psychiatric disorders of old age, there are certain conservative approaches to manage them successfully without a need for a hospital admission, or going to rehab centers or nursing homes, etc, for example, by using cognitive approaches, psychotherapeutic, sociological innovations and behavioral interventions.
In cognitive approaches the patient and the therapist work mutually to utilize an approach that comprises experimentation and reality testing.  The cognitive therapy helps the patient understand his/her internal flow of views and thoughts when disturbed, and to recognize and change the dysfunctional believes (Zunzunegui, Gutierrez, Beland, Del Ser, and Wolfson, 2000). By means of behavioral techniques seniors with delirium can be brought to normal life by regulating their behavior, restructuring their cognitive process and behavior. Modifying the underlying dysfunctional belief of the patient initiates long-term improvements and prevent hospital admissions.
By using a sociological approach, sociological perspectives attached to mental health and illness are addressed, including the edifice of mental disease in society (Jane et al, 2005).  They help promote the social participation for individuals with mental health issues, making their chances for employment better (Bond, 2004) and opposing bias and stigma.  On the other hand, the psychological component pays heed on the protection of seniors’ well being. The psychological innovations tackles problems by the understanding the influence of sociological, biological, and circumstantial factors on the psychological well-being and processes of an affected geriatric population (Garner, 2002). Likewise, increasing awareness of patients about their particular illness is also necessary as it serves as a crucial element in the senior care plan as well as in reducing stigma. Through a number of programs and successful activities, public can be educated well. Also, patients are advised to get involved in different physical activities because  these activities provides them an opportunity to reconnect and communicate with the society with the extra advantage of showcasing the capability of older patients with delirium or any other illness to still participate in such activities (Shepherd, Boardman, and Slade, 2008).
Besides, aging comes with a number of other health issues, such as urologic issues associated with a different underlying health conditions (Drach, 2008).  Even urinary problems go along with some mental health illnesses.  An aging may also cause an increase in the number of aged patients undergoing surgical treatment.  Nowadays, a range of biobehavioral therapies are recommended as first-line treatment choices mainly for elderly patients (Drach and Forciea, 2005). They may address several urologic issues like urinary incontinence.  These conservative therapies provide bladder training along with planned toileting, incited or assisted voiding schedules and exercises for pelvic floor muscle.  Thus, geriatric patients can independently manage their problems related to urology.
The field of geriatric mental health is vast and rapidly growing in extent and complexity. It is therefore important to work with conservative and conventional innovations along with physicians in keeping older population healthy.  Such psychosocial and psychodynamic approaches target an emotional aspect in treating conditions like delirium, dementia, or other older people illnesses and are plausible interventions. They offer considerable promise for the management of a number of health issues of elderly patients and occasionally may be the treatment of choice considering their efficacy and easy adoptability by the elder patients. These approaches in association with pharmacological treatment can keep geriatric patients away from going to a nursing home or a hospice and consequently help solved the dilemma in medicine.




References
Bond, G. (2004). Supported employment: Evidence for an evidence-based practice. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 27, 345–359.
Corrigan, P.W., Edwards, A.B., Green, A., Diwan, S.L. & Penn, D.L. (2001). Prejudice, social distance and familiarity with mental illness. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 27(2), 219–225.
Drach G (2008). Fundamental issues in geriatric surgical care. American Urologic Association Plenary Session, Orlando, FL.
Drach G, Forciea, MA (2005).Geriatric patient care: basics for urologists. AUA Update Series 24, 33.
Garner J. (2002). Psychodynamic work and older adults. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 8, 128 – 135.
Jane-Llopis, E., Barry, M., Hosman, C. $ Patel, V. (2005). From evidence to practice: Mental health promotion and effectiveness: Strategies for action, 9-25.
Layard, R. (2004). Mental Health: Britain’s biggest social problem? London: Cabinet Office Strategy Unit.
Nelson, Todd D (2004) Ageism: Stereotyping and Prejudice Against Older Persons. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press, ISBN: 978-0-262-64057-2.
Shepherd, G., Boardman, J. & Slade, M. (2008). Making recovery a reality. London: Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health.
WHO, (2012). Ageing and life course, fighting stereotypes.
Zunzunegui MV, Gutierrez Cuadra P, Beland F, Del Ser T,Wolfson C (2000) Development of simple cognitive function measures in a community dwelling population of elderly in Spain. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 15, 130-140

Wednesday, 25 February 2015

Time 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average STDev Time 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average STDev
0 0.101 0.12 0.1 0.138 0.089 0.116 0.111 0.017546 0 0.107 0.107 0.1 0.167 0.084 0.109 0.112 0.028324
60 0.147 0.1 0.132 0.182 0.09 0.176 0.138 0.038065 60 0.161 0.098 0.165 0.207 0.086 0.16 0.146 0.045622
120 0.225 0.102 0.148 0.234 0.097 0.216 0.170 0.062727 120 0.238 0.104 0.239 0.264 0.089 0.183 0.186 0.074483
180 0.362 0.106 0.153 0.355 0.107 0.257 0.223 0.118275 180 0.381 0.106 0.389 0.399 0.093 0.191 0.260 0.146266
240 0.75 0.108 0.165 0.515 0.123 0.296 0.326 0.257313 240 0.624 0.111 0.613 0.573 0.117 0.208 0.374 0.25377
300 0.828 0.11 0.174 0.69 0.133 0.329 0.377 0.30845 300 0.867 0.112 0.851 0.756 0.198 0.204 0.498 0.361321
360 0.192 0.192 360 1.059 1.059
WT  Ethanol  Î”TOK Ethanol
Time 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average STDev Time 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average STDev
0 0.106 0.104 0.1 0.145 0.089 0.109 0.109 0.019031 0 0.112 0.099 0.1 0.169 0.098 0.109 0.115 0.027311
60 0.153 0.136 0.165 0.195 0.138 0.291 0.180 0.05865 60 0.165 0.133 0.169 0.22 0.154 0.254 0.183 0.04532
120 0.238 0.218 0.271 0.3 0.271 0.495 0.299 0.100266 120 0.259 0.239 0.265 0.343 0.278 0.693 0.346 0.173563
180 0.41 0.379 0.462 0.52 0.409 0.743 0.487 0.134853 180 0.451 0.419 0.453 0.588 0.458 0.715 0.514 0.114654
240 0.677 0.638 0.711 0.785 0.699 1.037 0.758 0.145066 240 0.598 0.711 0.707 0.858 0.493 1.015 0.730 0.185522
300 0.951 0.877 0.977 1.051 0.971 1.133 0.993 0.088231 300 1.032 0.93 0.965 1.125 1.068 1.121 1.040 0.080447
360 1.199 1.199 360 1.186 1.186
WT  Control  Î”TOK Ethanol
Time 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average STDev Time 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average STDev
0 0.108 0.108 0.098 0.144 0.09 0.115 0.111 0.018609 0 0.109 0.106 0.098 0.177 0.101 0.111 0.117 0.029793
60 0.163 0.137 0.164 0.212 0.134 0.28 0.182 0.055709 60 0.169 0.171 0.164 0.254 0.156 0.254 0.195 0.04625
120 0.249 0.223 0.278 0.329 0.245 0.517 0.307 0.10926 120 0.275 0.283 0.278 0.395 0.322 0.478 0.339 0.082094
180 0.454 0.393 0.473 0.562 0.385 0.759 0.504 0.140236 180 0.457 0.466 0.473 0.67 0.457 0.734 0.543 0.125085
240 0.742 0.684 0.733 0.84 0.746 1.084 0.805 0.145836 240 0.744 0.784 0.733 0.958 0.495 1.067 0.797 0.198544
300 1.039 0.96 1.018 1.133 1.086 1.197 1.072 0.08496 300 1.06 1.066 1.018 1.25 1.101 1.191 1.114 0.088351
360 1.246 1.246 360 1.246 1.246
Average WT Average ∆TOK STDev WT STDev ∆TOK
Time Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control Time Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control
0 0.111 0.109 0.111 0.112 0.115 0.117 0 0.018 0.019 0.019 0.028 0.027 0.030
60 0.138 0.180 0.182 0.146 0.183 0.195 60 0.038 0.059 0.056 0.046 0.045 0.046
120 0.170 0.299 0.307 0.186 0.346 0.339 120 0.063 0.100 0.109 0.074 0.174 0.082
180 0.223 0.487 0.504 0.260 0.514 0.543 180 0.118 0.135 0.140 0.146 0.115 0.125
240 0.326 0.758 0.805 0.374 0.730 0.797 240 0.257 0.145 0.146 0.254 0.186 0.199
300 0.377 0.993 1.072 0.498 1.040 1.114 300 0.308 0.088 0.085 0.361 0.080 0.088
360 0.192 1.199 1.246 1.059 1.186 1.246 360


WT ∆TOK
Time Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control
0 0.1 0.1 0.098 0.1 0.1 0.098
60 0.132 0.165 0.164 0.165 0.169 0.164
120 0.148 0.271 0.278 0.239 0.265 0.278
180 0.153 0.462 0.473 0.389 0.453 0.473
240 0.165 0.711 0.733 0.613 0.707 0.733
300 0.174 0.977 1.018 0.851 0.965 1.018
360 0.192 1.199 1.246 1.059 1.186 1.246




Drug 30mg in 1ml= 0.2M.  50µl in the cronical flask
Flask conc. 100mM 200mM
Control expriment (This is to see how candida albican grows)
Time WT ∆TOK
0 0.110 0.102
60 0.137 0.140
120 0.224 0.221
180 0.378 0.368
240 0.582 0.581
300 0.938 0.934
360 1.222 1.233


WT ∆TOK
Time Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control
0 0.101 0.106 0.108 0.107 0.112 0.109
60 0.147 0.153 0.163 0.161 0.165 0.169
120 0.225 0.238 0.249 0.238 0.259 0.275
180 0.362 0.41 0.454 0.381 0.451 0.457
240 0.75 0.677 0.742 0.624 0.598 0.744
300 0.828 0.951 1.039 0.867 1.032 1.06
360

WT ∆TOK
Time Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control Drug+Ethanol Ethanol Control
0 0.12 0.104 0.108 0.107 0.099 0.106
60 0.1 0.136 0.137 0.098 0.133 0.171
120 0.102 0.218 0.223 0.104 0.239 0.283
180 0.106 0.379 0.393 0.106 0.419 0.466
240 0.108 0.638 0.684 0.111 0.711 0.784
300 0.11 0.877 0.96 0.112 0.93 1.066
360

ANOVA 3

TOK Control vs Wt Control

Descriptives
Time









N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Minimum
Maximum

Lower Bound
Upper Bound
wt control
6
.6587
.43355
.17699
.2037
1.1136
.12
1.20
tok control
6
.4968
.37679
.15382
.1014
.8923
.11
1.07
Total
12
.5778
.39637
.11442
.3259
.8296
.11
1.20


ANOVA
Time






Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between Groups
.079
1
.079
.476
.506
Within Groups
1.650
10
.165


Total
1.728
11




Here, p= 0.50 i.e. greater than 0.05, therefore, no difference is present between TOK Control and Wt Control.





TOK and WT Drug Vs TOK and WT Control
ANOVA
Time2






Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between Groups
.992
3
.331
3.216
.045
Within Groups
2.057
20
.103


Total
3.049
23




Since p = 0.045, i.e. less than 0.05, thus a statistical significant difference is present between the groups. However, it is not known which of the particular groups differed. This can be easily found out using Multiple Comparisons table comprising the results of post-hoc tests.


ANOVA-- 2

Tok Ethanol Vs WT Ethanol
 (WT = wild type)
Descriptives
Time









N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Minimum
Maximum

Lower Bound
Upper Bound
wt ethanol
6
.4710
.34653
.14147
.1073
.8347
.11
.99
tok ethanol
6
.4880
.35107
.14333
.1196
.8564
.12
1.04
Total
12
.4795
.33270
.09604
.2681
.6909
.11
1.04


ANOVA
Time






Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between Groups
.001
1
.001
.007
.934
Within Groups
1.217
10
.122


Total
1.218
11





The p= 9.34 which is quite greater than 0.05, and thus, there is no difference between Tok Ethanol and WT Ethanol.