Genotypes were detected by PCR, followed by restriction analyses with specific endonucleases. In Han people, the M allele frequency was significantly higher in the CAAD group than in the control group. The CC/CS genotype and C allele

frequencies were significantly higher in the CAAD group than in the control group. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that PON1 55M allele [odds ratio (OR) = 1.889] and PON2 311C allele (OR = 1.692) are independent risk factors for CAAD. Combined genotype analysis showed that PON1 55M and PON2 311C alleles are independent risk factors for CAAD (OR = 1.428). In the Uighur population, the CC/CS genotype and C allele frequencies were significantly higher in the CAAD group than in the control group. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated

Fer-1 that PCI-32765 mouse the PON2 311C allele is an independent risk factor for CAAD. We conclude that the PON1 55M and PON2 311C alleles are independent risk factors for CAAD in essential hypertension patients from the Xinjiang Han population. We also conclude that the PON2 311C allele is a risk factor for CAAD in essential hypertension patients from the Xinjiang Uighur population.”
“Study Design. Economic evaluation from a societal perspective alongside a 12-months randomized-controlled trial.\n\nObjective. To determine the cost-effectiveness of wearing a lumbar support for home care workers with recurrent low back pain (LBP) (secondary prevention).\n\nSummary of Background Data. LBP is a large medical and economical burden. Evidence on the secondary preventive use of lumbar supports is sparse.\n\nMethods. A total of 360 home care workers with a self-reported history of LBP were randomly assigned to Small molecule library concentration usual care or usual care plus wearing a lumbar support on working days with

LBP, during a 1-year period. Primary clinical outcome measures were the average number of self-reported days with LBP, number of calendar days sick leave in general, and quality of life. Direct and indirect costs were measured by means of cost diaries. Differences in mean costs between groups, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility ratios were evaluated, and cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves presented by applying nonparametric boots-trapping techniques.\n\nResults. During the intervention period, the home care workers using a lumbar support in addition to usual care reported on average 54 fewer days with LBP (95% confidence interval [CI], -85 to -29). The estimated mean difference in sick leave was not statistically significant (-5.0 days per year in favor of the lumbar support group; 95% CI, -21.1 to 6.8). There was no statistically significant difference in quality of life. Direct costs were (sic)235 (US$ 266) lower in the lumbar support group (95% CI, -386 to -79).