Search

Objective: To compare traditional cardiovascular (CV) risk factor management among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to that of matched non-RA controls within a large US managed care setting.Methods: Adult patients with RA and age- and sex-matched general population (general controls) or osteoarthritis (OA) controls were identified between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2011. We compared health care utilization, measurement, treatment, and treatment target achievement of traditional CV risk factors among subgroups of CV comorbidity during 1 year of followup between RA and controls.Results: A total of 9,440 RA patients, 31,009 general controls, and 10,352 OA controls were included. The proportions with measurements (blood pressure [BP], low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol, or hemoglobin A1c ), treatment (antihypertensive, statin, or anti-diabetes mellitus medications), and treatment target achievement were slightly higher in patients with RA compared with general controls. Controlling for other factors, RA patients were more likely to have a measurement of BP (odds ratio [OR] 16.77 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 10.01-28.08]) or LDL cholesterol (OR 1.25 [95% CI 1.13-1.39]), and to receive antihypertensive (OR 1.84 [95% CI 1.47-2.30]) or anti-diabetic medications (OR 1.26 [95% CI 1.01-1.56]) compared to general controls. RA was not associated with receiving a statin (OR 1.01 [95% CI 0.92-1.12]); however, a target LDL level was more likely to be achieved in RA compared to general controls (OR 1.27 [95% CI 1.17-1.37]) as well as target levels of BP and hemoglobin A1c . These results were consistent with results for OA controls except for a lower probability of receiving a statin in RA compared to OA.Conclusion: Traditional CV risk factors in patients with RA were not less aggressively managed compared to non-RA controls. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Layout study is important because layout largely determines the initial investment and production efficiency of a plant as compared with other downstream activities. Especially for semi-conductor production, the continued miniaturization of chips re- quires increased investment and operating cost. While approximately one billion U.S. dollars was necessary for a new semiconductor fab in 1995, manufacturers today need to invest two to three times that for the same type of facility. This research presents a new integrated room layout for a semiconductor fab. Machine tools are laid out in four large rooms. The tools in each room are connected by one overhead hoist transporter/overhead shuttle loop. This layout increases direct interbay transportation, product mix change flexibility, and routing flexibility and reduces transportation time and initial investment cost. The performance of this new layout is compared with the integrated bay layout that is favorably considered and being used in the literature and industry. This comparison uses data provided by International SEMATECH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]