(C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.”
“Purpose. To identify neck-pain-specific questionnaires and scales that measure functioning and disability and assess whether their contents are comparable to the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF).\n\nMethods. A

systematic search was conducted in LILACS, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and SPORTSDISCUS databases, identifying questionnaires and scales used to assess neck-related functioning and disability from 1966 to November 2007. Each item of each scale or questionnaire was extracted and classified according to the ICF categories.\n\nResults. The databases yielded CUDC-907 inhibitor a total of 888 articles, of which seven questionnaires were identified and included in the review. A total of 74 items were analyzed, 27 linked to body function, 46 to activities and participation, 1 to environmental factors, and 5 to non-classified items. find more While the pain disability index tends to focus on limitations to body functions, the functional rating index and the Copenhagen neck functional disability scale appear to be limited to measuring activity. Three questionnaires (the neck Bournemouth Questionnaire, the neck disability index, and the neck pain and disability

scale) have demonstrated a well-balanced distribution of items across the ICF components.\n\nConclusion. Stattic Most identified questionnaires reflect limitations or restrictions in one component only. These results provide valuable information on the content quality of these questionnaires for health-care providers and researchers.”
“In this work, a group of metallic aluminum foam-cored sandwich panels (AFSPs) were used as vehicle armor against blast loading. The dynamic responses of the AFSPs with various combinations of

face-sheet materials were analyzed using LS-DYNA. It was found that the AFSP with an aluminum (AA2024 T3) front face and a Rolled Homogeneous Armor (RHA) steel back face (labeled T3-AF-RHA) outperformed the other panel configurations in terms of maximum back face deflection (MaxD) and areal specific energy absorption (ASEA). It was also found that boundary conditions and the standoff distance (SoD) between an explosive and a target surface both have a remarkable influence on the blast response of the AFSPs. Using artificial neural network (ANN) approximation models, multi-objective design optimization (MDO) of the T3-AF-RHA panel was performed both with and without variations in blast load intensity. The optimization results show that the two objectives of MaxD minimization and ASEA maximization conflict with each other and that the optimal designs must be identified in a Pareto sense. Moreover, the Pareto curves obtained are different for varied blast impulse levels.