Úneta a la lista de correo. Requiere aprobación
Correo electrónico:
Consultar este grupo

lunes, 23 de noviembre de 2015

A Relative Risk-Based Framework for Safer, More Secure, and Sustainable Laboratory Capacity Building

BACKGROUND: Laboratory capacity building is characterized by a paradox between endemicity and resources: countries with high endemicity of pathogenic agents often have low and intermittent resources (water, electricity) and capacities (laboratories, trained staff, adequate regulations). Meanwhile, countries with low endemicity of pathogenic agents often have high-containment facilities with costly infrastructure and maintenance governed by regulations. The common practice of exporting high biocontainment facilities and standards is not sustainable and concerns about biosafety and biosecurity require careful consideration.
METHODS: A group at Chatham House developed a draft conceptual framework for safer, more secure, and sustainable laboratory capacity building.
RESULTS: The draft generic framework is guided by the phrase "LOCAL - PEOPLE - MAKE SENSE" that represents three major principles: capacity building according to local needs (local) with an emphasis on relationship and trust building (people) and continuous outcome and impact measurement (make sense).
CONCLUSION: This draft generic framework can serve as a blueprint for international policy decision-making on improving biosafety and biosecurity in laboratory capacity building, but requires more testing and detailing development.

Dickmann P, Sheeley H and Lightfoot N (2015). Biosafety and biosecurity: a relative risk-based framework for safer, more secure, and sustainable laboratory capacity building. Front. Public Health 3:241.

Sigue este Blog en Facebook y Twitter

jueves, 19 de noviembre de 2015

Awareness and low uptake of post exposure prophylaxis for HIV among clinical medical students

Background: Adequate knowledge and practices on post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for HIV among health care providers are crucial for HIV prevention. However there is limited data on PEP knowledge and practice from developing countries where the burden of HIV infection continues to increase. We assessed the knowledge of clinical medical students on PEP, their practices in response to occupational exposure to HIV, as well as the determinants of good knowledge on PEP.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in November 2014 involving 154 consecutively recruited clinical medical students (4th-6th year undergraduates). Data were acquired using a structured questionnaire. Knowledge on PEP was assessed using a questionnaire comprising 25 questions and categorized as: good (20 or more correct answers), moderate (13–19 correct answers) and poor (12 or fewer correct answers).
Results: For the 154 students included (57.8 % being male), the mean age was 23.2 ± 2.4 years, and 89 % had heard about PEP for HIV. The majority of students had moderate (61.7 %) and poor (32.5 %) knowledge on PEP. Overall knowledge score increased with increasing level of studies (p < 0.05). Only 10 (6.5 %) had had previous training on PEP, most of whom were senior level students (p = 0.01). Fifty-four students (35.1 %) knew the appropriate duration of PEP and this awareness increased with level of studies (p = 0.001). Of the 81 (52.6 %) who reported occupational exposure to HIV in the past, only 4 (4.9 %) received PEP.
Conclusions: Overall, knowledge on PEP among clinical medical students in this setting was non-optimal with very low uptake PEP. Intensification of HIV curricula to involve PEP as well as continuous medical education programs and workshops are potential avenues to improve awareness in this vulnerable population.
Ndemnge Aminde L. et al. Awareness and low uptake of post exposure prophylaxis for HIV among clinical medical students in a high endemicity setting. BMC Public Health. 2015; 15: 1104.
Sigue este Blog en Facebook y Twitter

lunes, 16 de noviembre de 2015

Laboratory-Acquired Parasitic Infections from Accidental Exposures #LAIs

Viejito pero de utilidad....

Parasitic diseases are receiving increasing attention in developed countries in part because of their importance in travelers, immigrants, and immunocompromised persons. The main purpose of this review is to educate laboratorians, the primary readership, and health care workers, the secondary readership, about the potential hazards of handling specimens that contain viable parasites and about the diseases that can result. This is accomplished partly through discussion of the occupationally acquired cases of parasitic infections that have been reported, focusing for each case on the type of accident that resulted in infection, the length of the incubation period, the clinical manifestations that developed, and the means by which infection was detected. The article focuses on the cases of infection with the protozoa that cause leishmaniasis, malaria, toxoplasmosis, Chagas' disease (American trypanosomiasis), and African trypanosomiasis. Data about 164 such cases are discussed, as are data about cases caused by intestinal protozoa and by helminths. Of the 105 case-patients infected with blood and tissue protozoa who either recalled an accident or for whom the likely route of transmission could be presumed, 47 (44.8%) had percutaneous exposure via a contaminated needle or other sharp object. Some accidents were directly linked to poor laboratory practices (e.g., recapping a needle or working barehanded). To decrease the likelihood of accidental exposures, persons who could be exposed to pathogenic parasites must be thoroughly instructed in safety precautions before they begin to work and through ongoing training programs. Protocols should be provided for handling specimens that could contain viable organisms, using protective clothing and equipment, dealing with spills of infectious organisms, and responding to accidents. Special care should be exercised when using needles and other sharp objects.

Herwaldt, Barbara L. “Laboratory-Acquired Parasitic Infections from  Accidental Exposures.” Clinical Microbiology Reviews 14.4 (2001): 659–688. PMC. Web. 3 Sept. 2015.

Sigue este Blog en Facebook y Twitter

jueves, 12 de noviembre de 2015

Comparison of Protection Factors Offered by N95 and P100 Filtering Facepiece and Elastomeric Half-Mask Respirators

This study compared the simulated workplace protection factors (SWPFs) between NIOSH-approved N95 respirators and P100 respirators, including two models of filtering facepiece respirator (FFR) and two models of elastomeric half-mask respirator (EHR), against sodium chloride particles (NaCl) in a range of 10 to 400 nm.
Twenty-five human test subjects performed modified OSHA fit test exercises in a controlled laboratory environment with the N95 respirators (two FFR models and two EHR models) and the P100 respirators (two FFRs and two EHRs). Two Scanning Mobility Particle Sizers (SMPS) were used to measure aerosol concentrations (in the 10–400 nm size range) inside (Cin) and outside (Cout) of the respirator, simultaneously. SWPF was calculated as the ratio of Cout to Cin. The SWPF values obtained from the N95 respirators were then compared to those of the P100 respirators.
SWPFs were found to be significantly different (P<0.05) between N95 and P100 class respirators. The 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 90th percentiles of the SWPFs for the N95 respirators were much lower than those for the P100 models. The N95 respirators had 5th percentiles of the SWPFs > 10. In contrast, the P100 class was able to generate 5th percentiles SWPFs > 100. No significant difference was found in the SWPFs when tested against nano-size (10 to 100 nm) and large-size (100 to 400 nm) particles.
Overall, the findings suggest that the two FFRs and two EHRs with P100 class filters provide better performance than those with N95 filters against particles from 10 to 400 nm, supporting current OSHA and NIOSH recommendations.
Keywords: Nano particle, N95, P100, FFR, HER, SWPF, Respirator

He, Xinjian et al. “Comparison of Simulated Workplace Protection Factors Offered by N95 and P100 Filtering Facepiece and Elastomeric Half-Mask Respirators against Particles of 10 to 400 Nm.” Journal of nanotechnology and materials science 2.2 (2015): 1–6. PMC. Web. 22 Oct. 2015.

Sigue este Blog en Facebook y Twitter

martes, 10 de noviembre de 2015

Membresías 2016 #AMEXBIO

Una de las fuentes de ingreso de AMEXBIO son las aportaciones de los miembros, por lo que invitamos a actualizar su membresía o unirse como miembro activo.

Los beneficios que obtendrás al pagar tu membresía 2016 son:
  1. Cuotas preferenciales para el Simposio Anual, cursos en línea, eventos, seminarios y productos que organice y promueva AMEXBIO.
  2. Poder conocer las diferentes convocatorias de las instituciones que apoyan con recursos o descuentos para participar en eventos nacionales e internacionales sobre temas de bioseguridad.
  3. Contar con su perfil académico y poder participar como profesor en nuestros cursos en línea o cursos presenciales.
  4. Participar activamente en todos los eventos académicos que organice nuestra Asociación.
  5. Constancia de miembro activo.
  6. Asistir a las Asambleas y participar activamente
La membresía 2016 es de $ 900.-


1. Si ya eres miembro y estas al corriente (Estatus Active):
    Paga el importe de $ 800.00** (actualiza tu perfil, hay campos nuevos)

2. Si ya eres miembro pero no estás al corriente (Estatus Pending Renewal o Lapsed):
Los miembros fundadores, titulares y numerarios que hayan dejado de pagar por varios años, podrán ponerse al corriente con todas sus cuotas al pagar   $ 400.00, además de pagar lo correspondiente a lamembresía 2016 de $ 800.00. 
El total del depósito sería de $ 1,200.00** para ponerse al corriente y renovar hasta febrero de 2017. (actualiza tu perfil, hay campos nuevos)

3. Si no eres miembro (Estatus visitante o en blanco):
Los profesores o investigadores de nuevo ingreso deberán enviar el pago de $ 800.00**,  actualizar su perfil en la página de miembros: www.amexbio.wildapricot.org y enviar la documentación solicitada, al correo electrónico de miembros@amexbio.org.


Por favor ayúdanos a distribuir esta información entre tus contactos que les pueda interesar en participar en AMEXBIO.
**- Depósito bancario a nombre de:
CLABE interbancaria: 002180024179950244
Sucursal: 0241
Cuenta: 7995024
Referencia:(nombre del miembro)
Enviar el comprobante de depósito escaneado y datos de facturación (si es necesario) al siguiente correo electrónico: tesoreria@amexbio.org

Se emitirá la factura correspondiente, así como la constancia de membresía, que se enviarán por correo electrónico.

Consejo Directivo AMEXBIO 2015-2106

** Vigencia de promoción: al 30 de Diciembre 2015

Sigue este Blog en Facebook y Twitter

lunes, 9 de noviembre de 2015

A New Synthesis for Dual Use Research of Concern #DURC

In 2004, the National Research Council (NRC) published Biotechnology Research in an Age of Terrorism, which introduced the term "dual use dilemma" to denote beneficial life sciences research whose results could be misused to cause harm. That phrase evolved into “dual use research of concern” or DURC. The subsequent decade was characterized by a dichotomy in the response of scientists and the public, with both avid interest and complete disinterest. DURC was a largely specialized issue with awareness confined to a small group of experts in the scientific, government, and security communities until a vigorous and sometimes acrimonious debate erupted in 2011–2012 when two manuscripts reported the experimental derivation of mammalian transmissible H5N1 influenza. Here, we examine a decade of dual use and propose a new synthesis for moving forward.


Imperiale MJ, Casadevall A (2015) A New Synthesis for Dual Use Research of Concern. PLoS Med 12(4): e1001813. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001813

Sigue este Blog en Facebook y Twitter

jueves, 5 de noviembre de 2015

Parasitic cancer in human host

Neoplasms occur naturally in invertebrates but are not known to develop in tapeworms. We observed nests of monomorphic, undifferentiated cells in samples from lymph-node and lung biopsies in a man infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The morphologic features and invasive behavior of the cells were characteristic of cancer, but their small size suggested a nonhuman origin. A polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) assay targeting eukaryotes identified Hymenolepis nana DNA. Although the cells were unrecognizable as tapeworm tissue, immunohistochemical staining and probe hybridization labeled the cells in situ. Comparative deep sequencing identified H. nana structural genomic variants that are compatible with mutations described in cancer. Invasion of human tissue by abnormal, proliferating, genetically altered tapeworm cells is a novel disease mechanism that links infection and cancer. 

Malignant Transformation of Hymenolepis nana in a Human Host. Muehlenbachs A, Bhatnagar J, Agudelo CA, Hidron A, Eberhard ML, Mathison BA, Frace MA, Ito A, Metcalfe MG, Rollin DC, Visvesvara GS, Pham CD, Jones TL, Greer PW, Vélez Hoyos A, Olson PD, Diazgranados LR, Zaki SR. N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 5;373(19):1845-1852.

PUNZOCORTANTES: Tipos de dispositivos de seguridad

Descargar poster completo en PDF
Cuando seleccióne un dispositivo punzocortante es importante considerar:
El dispositivo no debe comprometer el cuidado del paciente.
El dispositivo debe ser confiable.
El mecanismo de seguridad debe ser parte integral del dispositivo, no debe ser un component accesorio.
El dispositivo debe ser de fácil manejo, y requerir el mínimo cambio en la técnica de manejo.
La activación del dispositivo debe ser conveniente y permitir que al usuario el apropiado control del procedimiento.
El dispositivo no debe crear otros riesgos o fuentes de exposición a la sangre.
Debe ser de único manejo o de activación autimática.
La activación debe manifestarse de forma audible, táctil o visual.
La activación del dispositivo no debe ser reversible una vez activada.

  1. CONECTORES SIN AGUJAS. Permiten la conexión de soluciones sin el uso de agujas punzocortantes.
  2. DISPOSITIVOS RETRÁCTILES. Permite la inactivación de los punzocortantes (agujas, lancetas), retrayendolos y ocultándolos después de su uso. 
  3. CAMISAS PROTECTORAS. Con dispositivos que cubren a la lanceta o aguja después de utilizarlos. Generalmente unidos a las porciones plásticas de las agujas o busturies.
  4. AGUJAS ALADAS. Permiten un mejor manejo de agujas.
  5. AGUJAS OCULTAS. Diseñado con un punto/sin núcleo desviado para eliminar el potencial de "extracción de muestras", o el corte de un tapón del tabique de silicona de un puerto vascular.
  6. TRANSPORTADOR DE PUNZOCORTANTES. Facilita la transferencia de punzocortantes, que prevé la colocación segura y recuperación de objetos punzantes.
  7. CONTENEDORES DE PUNZOCORTANTES. Contenedores para la eliminación de objetos punzantes, colocados lo más cerca posible de las áreas donde se utilizan o se encuentran los objetos punzantes.
Este artículo es con propósitos educativos. El blog no recomienda ninguna marca en específico.

Sigue este Blog en Facebook y Twitter

martes, 3 de noviembre de 2015

Economic evaluations of mask and respirator use for protection against respiratory infection transmission

There has been increasing debate surrounding mask and respirator interventions to control respiratory infection transmission in both healthcare and community settings. As decision makers are considering the recommendations they should evaluate how to provide the most efficient protection strategies with minimum costs. The aim of this review is to identify and evaluate the existing economic evaluation literature in this area and to offer advice on how future evaluations on this topic should be conducted.
We searched the Scopus database for all literature on economic evaluation of mask or respirator use to control respiratory infection transmission. Reference lists from the identified studies were also manually searched. Seven studies met our inclusion criteria from the initial 806 studies identified by the search strategy and our manual search.
Five studies considered interventions for seasonal and/or pandemic influenza, with one also considering SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome). The other two studies focussed on tuberculosis transmission control interventions. The settings and methodologies of the studies varied greatly. No low-middle income settings were identified. Only one of the reviewed studies cited clinical evidence to inform their mask/respirator intervention effectiveness parameters. Mask and respirator interventions were generally reported by the study authors to be cost saving or cost-effective when compared to no intervention or other control measures, however the evaluations had important limitations.
Given the large cost differential between masks and respirators, there is a need for more comprehensive economic evaluations to compare the relative costs and benefits of these interventions in situations and settings where alternative options are potentially applicable. There are at present insufficient well conducted cost-effectiveness studies to inform decision-makers on the value for money of alternative mask/respirator options.
Keywords: Respirator, Facemask, Economic evaluation, Cost-effectiveness, Influenza, Tuberculosis

Shohini Mukerji, C. Raina MacIntyre, Anthony T. Newall. Review of economic evaluations of mask and respirator use for protection against respiratory infection transmission. BMC Infect Dis. 2015; 15: 413. Published online 2015 October 13.
Sigue este Blog en Facebook y Twitter

jueves, 29 de octubre de 2015


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...