Search

BSTRACT: The determination of probable ground water impacts of proposed deep coal mining is required as part of permit applications. Impact prediction generally involves well production test analysis and modeling of ground water systems associated with coal seams. Well production tests are often complicated due to the relatively low permeabilities of sandstones and shales of ground water systems. The effects of the release of water stored within finite diameter production wells must be considered. Well storage capacity appreciably affects early well production test time drawdown or time recovery data. Low pumping rates, limited cones of depression, and length of required pumping periods ate important well production test design factors. Coal seam ground water system models are usually multilayered and leaky artesian. Mine drafts partially penetrate the ground water system. Simulation of coal mine drainage often involves the horizontal permeability and storage coefficient of the coal seam zone, vertical permeabilities of sandstones and shales (aquitard) above and below the coal seam zone, and the hydrologic properties of the source bed above the aqultard overlying the coal seam zone. Ground water level declines in both the coal seam zone and source bed near land surface are necessary factors in impact analysis. An example of evaluation studies in southwest Indiana will illustrate factors involved in deep coal mine drainage modeling efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Methods Results Conclusion To systematically compare the global prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and care‐seeking in rural and urban populations.A systematic review with meta‐analysis of observational studies reporting a direct comparison of rural and urban populations was conducted worldwide and included back, knee, hip, shoulder, neck pain and a broad diagnosis of ‘musculoskeletal pain’. A search strategy combining terms related to ‘prevalence’, ‘musculoskeletal pain’ and ‘rural’ was used on the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and rural and remote health from their inception to 1 June 2022. Random‐effects meta‐analysis was used to pool the data. Results were presented as odds ratios (OR) along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).A total of 42 studies from 24 countries were included with a total population of 489 439 participants. The quality scores for the included studies, using the modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale tool, showed an average score of 0.78/1, which represents an overall good quality. The pooled analysis showed statistically greater odds of hip (OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.23–2.15), shoulder (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.06–1.90) and overall musculoskeletal pain (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.08–1.47) in rural populations compared to urban populations. Although the odds of seeking treatment were higher in rural populations this relationship was not statistically significant (OR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.55–1.03).Very low‐certainty evidence suggests that musculoskeletal, hip and shoulder pain are more prevalent in rural than urban areas, although neck, back and knee pain, along with care‐seeking, showed no significant difference between these populations. Strategies aimed to reduce the burden of musculoskeletal pain should consider the specific needs and limited access to quality evidence‐based care for musculoskeletal pain of rural populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]