The theory of speech acts tells us that when words are uttered,they perform three different kinds of speech acts.But cross-cultural communication raises a question that the same locutionary acts may perform different ...The theory of speech acts tells us that when words are uttered,they perform three different kinds of speech acts.But cross-cultural communication raises a question that the same locutionary acts may perform different illocutionary acts and perlocutionary acts,and in order to achieve the same illocutionary acts and perlocutionary acts,people with different native languages may employ different locutionary acts to avoid the pragmatic failure.This paper aims to illustrate the differences on greeting,requesting,and rejecting between Chinese and Americans,focus on the cultural factors in language and cross-cultural communication,and using the fundamental cross-cultural theories to analyze the distinctions,such as Austin’s Speech Act Theory,Brown and Levinson Face Theory,Edward T Hall’s High-Context and Low-Context Communication,and Hofestede’s Value Dimensions.Finally,it tells the English learners to focus on the cultural difference in the cross-cultural communication to achieve the successful communication.展开更多
目的建立测定人血浆中美罗培南血药浓度的液相色谱-串联质谱(liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry,LC-MS/MS)方法,并将该方法应用于重症加强护理病房(intensive care unit,ICU)脓毒症患者治疗药物监测。方法以Kinetex-C1810...目的建立测定人血浆中美罗培南血药浓度的液相色谱-串联质谱(liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry,LC-MS/MS)方法,并将该方法应用于重症加强护理病房(intensive care unit,ICU)脓毒症患者治疗药物监测。方法以Kinetex-C18100A(2.6μm,4 mm×50 mm)为色谱柱,流动相为甲醇-1‰甲酸水溶液(60∶40,v/v),流速:0.4 mL/min,柱温40℃,进样量3μL。以卡马西平为内标,采用串联质谱检测器电喷雾离子源(electron spray ionization,ESI),以正离子多离子反应监测(multiple reaction monitoring,MRM)扫描方式进行监测,定量分析离子对分别为m/z 384→141(美罗培南)、m/z 237→194(卡马西平),并将该方法应用于197例次ICU脓毒症患者治疗药物的监测。结果人血浆中美罗培南浓度在0.02~30 mg/L围内线性关系良好,标准曲线方程为y=4.934×10^(-5)x+2.083×10^(-2)(r=0.9999)。批间和批内精密度RSD<3%,回收率为91.96%~100.97%。197例次ICU脓毒症患者血药浓度范围为0~16.33 mg/L。结论本方法简便、快速,敏感度高、专属性强、结果准确,可用于美罗培南在脓毒症患者治疗药物中的监测。展开更多
目的验证全面触发工具(global trigger tool,GTT)在老年住院患者药品不良事件(adverse drug event,ADE)监测中的可行性。方法根据《IHI global trigger tool for measuring adverse events》中推荐的触发器和国内其他研究使用的触发器,...目的验证全面触发工具(global trigger tool,GTT)在老年住院患者药品不良事件(adverse drug event,ADE)监测中的可行性。方法根据《IHI global trigger tool for measuring adverse events》中推荐的触发器和国内其他研究使用的触发器,并结合该院生化指标范围、药品目录和该院老年患者处方习惯,对触发器进行调整,最终制定出31项触发器。随机抽取本院2015年12月26日至2016年12月25日老年病科65岁以上出院病历360份,使用GTT审查病历,再通过Naranjo评定法判定ADE,将确定的ADE进行严重程度分级、造成ADE的药物类别和累及系统-器官分析。应用SPSS 21.0软件进行统计分析,检验水准为α=0.05(双侧)。结果审查的360份病历中,触发器检出阳性的患者169例,阳性率为46.94%。31项触发器中,19项触发器检出阳性。75例患者发生98例次ADE,ADE发生率为20.83%(75/360)。98例次ADE中,E级伤害97例次,F级伤害1例次。ADE共涉及9类药物,其中心血管系统药物导致ADE发生的占比最高,达58.16%;共累及系统-器官11个,其中代谢及营养障碍占比最高,达42.86%。GTT的真实性指标:灵敏度为100.00%,特异度67.02%,正确指数0.67。可靠性指标:符合率73.89%,Kappa值0.46。阳性预测值(positive predictive value,PPV)为44.38%。经Logistic回归分析发现,年龄、住院天数、用药品规数、触发器检出阳性数和基础疾病数对老年住院患者ADE发生有显著影响。结论GTT用于监测老年住院患者ADE的真实性、可靠性较好,PPV较高,但部分触发器需继续改进。展开更多
文摘The theory of speech acts tells us that when words are uttered,they perform three different kinds of speech acts.But cross-cultural communication raises a question that the same locutionary acts may perform different illocutionary acts and perlocutionary acts,and in order to achieve the same illocutionary acts and perlocutionary acts,people with different native languages may employ different locutionary acts to avoid the pragmatic failure.This paper aims to illustrate the differences on greeting,requesting,and rejecting between Chinese and Americans,focus on the cultural factors in language and cross-cultural communication,and using the fundamental cross-cultural theories to analyze the distinctions,such as Austin’s Speech Act Theory,Brown and Levinson Face Theory,Edward T Hall’s High-Context and Low-Context Communication,and Hofestede’s Value Dimensions.Finally,it tells the English learners to focus on the cultural difference in the cross-cultural communication to achieve the successful communication.
文摘目的验证全面触发工具(global trigger tool,GTT)在老年住院患者药品不良事件(adverse drug event,ADE)监测中的可行性。方法根据《IHI global trigger tool for measuring adverse events》中推荐的触发器和国内其他研究使用的触发器,并结合该院生化指标范围、药品目录和该院老年患者处方习惯,对触发器进行调整,最终制定出31项触发器。随机抽取本院2015年12月26日至2016年12月25日老年病科65岁以上出院病历360份,使用GTT审查病历,再通过Naranjo评定法判定ADE,将确定的ADE进行严重程度分级、造成ADE的药物类别和累及系统-器官分析。应用SPSS 21.0软件进行统计分析,检验水准为α=0.05(双侧)。结果审查的360份病历中,触发器检出阳性的患者169例,阳性率为46.94%。31项触发器中,19项触发器检出阳性。75例患者发生98例次ADE,ADE发生率为20.83%(75/360)。98例次ADE中,E级伤害97例次,F级伤害1例次。ADE共涉及9类药物,其中心血管系统药物导致ADE发生的占比最高,达58.16%;共累及系统-器官11个,其中代谢及营养障碍占比最高,达42.86%。GTT的真实性指标:灵敏度为100.00%,特异度67.02%,正确指数0.67。可靠性指标:符合率73.89%,Kappa值0.46。阳性预测值(positive predictive value,PPV)为44.38%。经Logistic回归分析发现,年龄、住院天数、用药品规数、触发器检出阳性数和基础疾病数对老年住院患者ADE发生有显著影响。结论GTT用于监测老年住院患者ADE的真实性、可靠性较好,PPV较高,但部分触发器需继续改进。
