The Community Development Coporation

Review of Community Development Corporation (CDC) Model, its role as a community action agency, and the Community Self-Determination Act of 1968

Robotic versus laparoscopic approach in colonic resections for cancer and Benign diseases. Systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives The aim of this systematic review and meta-Analysis is to compare robotic colectomy (RC) with laparoscopic colectomy (LC) in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Materials and Methods A systematic literature search was performed to retrieve comparative studies of robotic and laparoscopic colectomy. The databases searched were PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 2000 to October 2014. The Odds ratio, Risk difference and Mean difference were used as the summary statistics. Results A total of 12 studies, which included a total of 4,148 patients who had undergone robotic or laparoscopic colectomy, were included and analyzed. RC demonstrated a longer operative time (MD 41.52, P<0.00001) and higher cost (MD 2.42, P<0.00001) than did LC. The time to first flatus passage (MD-0.51, P = 0.003) and the length of hospital stay (MD-0.68, P = 0.01) were significantly shorter after RC. Additionally, the intraoperative blood loss (MD-16.82, P<0.00001) was significantly less in RC. There was also a significantly lower incidence of overall postoperative complications (OR 0.74, P = 0.02) and wound infections (RD-0.02, P = 0.03) after RC. No differences in the postoperative ileus, in the anastomotic leak, or in the conversion to open surgery rate and in the number of harvested lymph nodes outcomes were found between the approaches. Conclusions The present meta-Analysis, mainly based on observational studies, suggests that RC is more time-consuming and expensive than laparoscopy but that it results in faster recovery of bowel function, a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss and lower rates of both overall postoperative complications and wound infections. Copyright: © 2015 Trastulli et al.OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare robotic colectomy (RC) with laparoscopic colectomy (LC) in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to retrieve comparative studies of robotic and laparoscopic colectomy. The databases searched were PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 2000 to October 2014. The Odds ratio, Risk difference and Mean difference were used as the summary statistics. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies, which included a total of 4,148 patients who had undergone robotic or laparoscopic colectomy, were included and analyzed. RC demonstrated a longer operative time (MD 41.52, P<0.00001) and higher cost (MD 2.42, P<0.00001) than did LC. The time to first flatus passage (MD -0.51, P = 0.003) and the length of hospital stay (MD -0.68, P = 0.01) were significantly shorter after RC. Additionally, the intraoperative blood loss (MD -16.82, P<0.00001) was significantly less in RC. There was also a significantly lower incidence of overall postoperative complications (OR 0.74, P = 0.02) and wound infections (RD -0.02, P = 0.03) after RC. No differences in the postoperative ileus, in the anastomotic leak, or in the conversion to open surgery rate and in the number of harvested lymph nodes outcomes were found between the approaches. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis, mainly based on observational studies, suggests that RC is more time-consuming and expensive than laparoscopy but that it results in faster recovery of bowel function, a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss and lower rates of both overall postoperative complications and wound infections

QED self-energy contribution to highly-excited atomic states

We present numerical values for the self-energy shifts predicted by QED (Quantum Electrodynamics) for hydrogenlike ions (nuclear charge $60 \le Z \le 110$) with an electron in an $n=3$, 4 or 5 level with high angular momentum ($5/2\le j \le 9/2$). Applications include predictions of precision transition energies and studies of the outer-shell structure of atoms and ions.Comment: 20 pages, 5 figure

¿Cómo influye en el éxito de la transferencia de conocimiento la percepción que el receptor tiene del emisor?

El trabajo aborda el proceso de transferencia de conocimiento, discutiendo la influencia que ejerce la percepción que el receptor de conocimiento tiene de su emisor. Para ello se analiza un caso específico en el que tiene lugar el citado proceso de transferencia de conocimiento: los acuerdos de cooperación tecnológica entre empresa y universidad. Dichos acuerdos constituyen una de las alternativas, junto a la adquisición y el desarrollo interno, de que dispone la empresa en el momento de afrontar el proceso innovador. El análisis se inicia con una aproximación al concepto de conocimiento y a la justificación de la tecnología como forma de conocimiento, tras lo cual se reflexiona sobre su transferencia. Seguidamente se analizan los acuerdos de cooperación tecnológica, entre los que se encuentran los que se establecen con la universidad. A continuación se exponen las principales ideas en relación con la influencia de la percepción del receptor en el éxito de la transferencia. Finalmente los hallazgos teóricos se someten a contraste empírico de manera exploratoria en una muestra de acuerdos de cooperación tecnológica en el ámbito español.This work addresses knowledge transfer by discussing the influence of the recipient’s perception about the source’s reliability. A specific case of knowledge transfer is analyzed: technological cooperation agreements. These agreements are one of the firm’s alternatives in order to culminate the innovative process. The analysis begins with the introduction to the concept of knowledge and the justification of the technology as a type of knowledge, after which a reflection is done on its transfer. Next, technological cooperation agreements are analyzed, specifically university-industry agreements. After that, we address the main ideas linked to recipient’s perception about the source’s reliability in the success of knowledge transfer. Finally, the theoretical findings are tested empirically in a sample of technological cooperation agreement in Spain from an exploratory view