Inertial sensor real-time feedback enhances the learning of cervical spine manipulation: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Cervical Spinal Manipulation (CSM) is considered a high-level skill of the central nervous system because it requires bimanual coordinated rhythmical movements therefore necessitating training to achieve proficiency. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effect of real-time feedback on the performance of CSM. METHODS: Six postgraduate physiotherapy students attending a training workshop on Cervical Spine Manipulation Technique (CSMT) using inertial sensor derived real-time feedback participated in this study. The key variables were pre-manipulative position, angular displacement of the thrust and angular velocity of the thrust. Differences between variables before and after training were investigated using t-tests. RESULTS: There were no significant differences after training for the pre-manipulative position (rotation p = 0.549; side bending p = 0.312) or for thrust displacement (rotation p = 0.247; side bending p = 0.314). Thrust angular velocity demonstrated a significant difference following training for rotation (pre-training mean (sd) 48.9°/s (35.1); post-training mean (sd) 96.9°/s (53.9); p = 0.027) but not for side bending (p = 0.521). CONCLUSION: Real-time feedback using an inertial sensor may be valuable in the development of specific manipulative skill. Future studies investigating manipulation could consider a randomized controlled trial using inertial sensor real time feedback compared to traditional training

Biodiversity of the Colorado State University lands

Prepared for: Colorado State University Facilities Management.June 2022.Includes bibliographical references.During the academic year of 2021-2022, the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) was contracted by CSU Facilities Management to complete a biodiversity survey of the CSU lands. This assessment will be used by Facilities Management to self-report on the Biodiversity component of the Operations category in the STARS (Sustainability, Tracking, Assessment, & Ratings System) report. This report assesses endangered and vulnerable species (including migratory species) on CSU-owned and managed lands and areas of biodiversity importance on CSU-owned and managed lands. An additional aim of this project was to include students in the geospatial analysis, research, and field data collection efforts, thereby lowering project costs and providing mentorship and experience to the students. Biodiversity was assessed through a geospatial environmental review of the properties which includes documented and potential occurrences of regulatory species and other species of concern within the property and a 1-mile buffer, assessment of the conservation areas adjacent to the property and within a buffer, and the diversity and acreage of wetlands and other ecosystem types. The conservation value of each property, based on a Return-on-Investment report, is presented. Geospatial data area used to evaluate climate resiliency and landscape disturbance. Further research into species on the largest and most well-studied properties is presented, along with results of field work. Colorado State University holds 32 individual properties, spanning 14 counties across Colorado, covering a total of 3,943 hectares. Properties held by CSU had 303 documented occurrences of regulatory species and other species of concern within 1 mile returned in the environmental review; additionally, potential habitat was returned for another 2210 regulatory and other species of concern from a combination of range maps, general precision CNHP element occurrence records, and models. Through the many metrics of biodiversity assessed, several properties stood out; these included the Eastern Colorado Research Center, the Mountain Campus, Foothills, Horsetooth, and the Environmental Learning Center. At the Eastern Colorado Research Center, a combination of research field work recorded 187 species as visual observations and/or within a modeled area. At the Mountain Campus, student research and field work recorded a total of 1,044 species as visual observations and/or within a modeled area, with 754 Animalia species, 273 Plantae species and 17 Fungi species. Along with providing information on the biodiversity on the CSU lands, this project provided educational value to CSU students and facilitated the creation of a storymap to showcase the biodiversity of CSU lands to the public and stakeholders. The biodiversity assessment suggests several actions which could be taken to protect, enhance, or restore the biodiversity found on CSU lands and identified properties with possible conservation gains through enhancement and restoration.June 2022

Safety and Tolerability of Concomitant Administration of Multiple-Dose AM833 With Semaglutide 2.4 MG for Weight Management

Abstract Background: Combining weight management medications with different modes of action may provide more effective treatment options for people with obesity. Subcutaneous (sc) AM833, a long-acting amylin analog, and sc semaglutide 2.4 mg, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, are both under clinical development for weight management. Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 trial to investigate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics of concomitant administration of six ascending doses of weekly AM833 (0.16, 0.3, 0.6, 1.2, 2.4, or 4.5 mg) + semaglutide vs placebo + semaglutide in subjects with overweight or obesity. The 20-week trial included a 16-week escalation period followed by a 4-week treatment period at target dose and a 5-week follow-up. Eligible subjects were male or female of non-childbearing potential, aged 18–55 years, with BMI 27−39.9 kg/m2. The primary endpoint was number of adverse events (AE) from baseline to follow-up. Secondary endpoints included PK parameters (area under the curve [AUC] 0–168 h [AUC0-168], maximum concentration [Cmax], half-life [t1/2] and time to Cmax [tmax]). Changes in body weight (exploratory endpoint) were analyzed separately for AM833 0.16−2.4 mg + semaglutide (vs pooled placebo) and AM833 4.5 mg + semaglutide (vs matched placebo) due to a different semaglutide dose escalation regimen used in this treatment arm. Results: Of 96 subjects randomized, 95 were exposed to treatment (59% male; mean age 40.6 years, body weight 95.7 kg, BMI 32.1 kg/m2) and 80 (83%) completed the trial. The number of AEs ranged from 37–89 with AM833 (0.16–4.5 mg) + semaglutide and 132 with pooled placebo + semaglutide. Most AEs were mild or moderate and the proportion of subjects with ≥1 AE was similar across treatment arms. About one-third of all AEs were gastrointestinal (GI) disorders (n=207 of 566), primarily nausea, dyspepsia, and vomiting. A greater proportion of subjects reported GI AEs with AM833 1.2–4.5 mg + semaglutide vs placebo + semaglutide. The second most common AEs were injection site reactions (n=72), all mild and not dependent on AM833 dose. Exposure to AM833 was proportional to dose for both AUC0-168 and Cmax, and did not affect semaglutide exposure and elimination. AM833 0.16−4.5 mg t1/2 ranged from 159–195 h and median tmax ranged from 24–72 h. At week 20, body weight changes from baseline with AM833 1.2 and 2.4 mg + semaglutide were greater vs pooled placebo + semaglutide (−15.7% and −17.1% vs −9.8%, respectively; p&amp;lt;0.001) and with AM833 4.5 mg + semaglutide vs matched placebo + semaglutide (−15.4% vs −8.0%; p&amp;lt;0.01). Conclusion: Treatment with AM833 at all tested doses + semaglutide was generally well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile. PK data support once-weekly dosing. The combination of AM833 1.2, 2.4, or 4.5 mg + semaglutide led to greater weight loss compared with placebo + semaglutide.</jats:p