Summary Regional anaesthesia is a popular choice for patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Neurological function is easily assessed during carotid cross-clamping; haemodynamic control is predictable; and hospital stay is consistently shorter compared with general anaesthesia (GA). Despite these purported benefits, mortality and stroke rates associated with CEA remain around 5% for both regional anaesthesia and GA. Regional anaesthetic techniques for CEA have improved with improved methods of location of peripheral nerves including nerve stimulators and ultrasound together with a modification in the classification of cervical plexus blocks. There have also been improvements in local anaesthetic, sedative, and arterial pressure-controlling drugs in patients undergoing CEA, together with advances in the management of patients who develop neurological deficit after carotid cross-clamping. In the UK, published national guidelines now require the time between the patient's presenting neurological event and definitive treatment to 1 week or less. This has implications for the ability of vascular centres to provide specialized vascular anaesthetists familiar with regional anaesthetic techniques for CEA. Providing effective regional anaesthesia for CEA is an important component in the armamentarium of techniques for the vascular anaesthetist in 2014.

BackgroundTeaCrine® is the synthetic version to naturally occurring theacrine (1, 3, 7, 9-tetramethyluric acid) found in the leaves of Camellia kucha tea plants. A few studies have examined the effects of TeaCrine® on cognitive perception, but no research exists examining its effects on resistance exercise performance. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of TeaCrine®, a caffeine-like compound, on maximal muscular strength, endurance, and power performance in resistance-trained men.MethodsTwelve resistance-trained men participated in a randomized, double-blind, cross-over designed study. Each participant performed one-repetition maximum (1RM) bench press, 1RM squat, bench press repetitions to failure (RTF) at 70% 1RM, squat RTF at 70% 1RM, and 2-km rowing time trial 90 min after consumption of: (1) Caffeine 300 mg (CAFF300); (2) TeaCrine® 300 mg (TEA300); (3) TeaCrine® + Caffeine (COMBO; 150 mg/150 mg); (4) Placebo 300 mg (PLA). Power and velocity were measured using a TENDO Power Analyzer. Visual analogue scales for energy, focus, motivation to exercise, and fatigue were administered at baseline and 90 min post-treatment ingestion (pre-workout). Rating of perceived exertion was assessed after bench press RTF and squat RTF.ResultsThere were no differences between groups for 1RM, RTF, and power in the bench press and squat exercises. Only CAFF300 resulted in significant increases in perceived energy and motivation to exercise vs. TEA300 and PLA (Energy: + 9.8%, 95% confidence interval [3.3–16.4%], p < 0.01; + 15.3%, 95% CI [2.2–28.5%], p < 0.02; Motivation to exercise: + 8.9%, 95% CI [0.2–17.6%], p = 0.04, + 14.8%, 95% CI [4.7–24.8%], p < 0.01, respectively) and increased focus (+ 9.6%, 95% CI [2.1–17.1%], p = 0.01) vs. TEA300, but there were no significant differences between CAFF300 and COMBO (Energy + 3.9% [− 6.9–14.7%], Focus + 2.5% [− 6.3–11.3%], Motivation to exercise + 0.5% [− 11.6–12.6%]; p > 0.05).ConclusionNeither TEA300, CAFF300, COMBO, or PLA (when consumed 90 min pre-exercise) improved muscular strength, power, or endurance performance in resistance-trained men. Only CAFF300 improved measures of focus, energy, and motivation to exercise.

Fully automated vehicles hold promise for providing numerous societal benefits, including drastically reducing road fatalities. However, we know little about the adoption practices of individuals related to automated vehicles. To assess transportation users’ perceptions of automated vehicles, a 40-item survey was designed using guidance from several technology acceptance models. A focus group was used to assess face validity to ensure the items appeared credible and understandable to the layperson. Seven subject-matter experts rated items for their relevance to provide a content validity index for each item and for the overall survey. The final scale had a scale content validity index rating of 1.00, with 32 of 32 items rated greater than or equal to 0.86 and a scale content validity index of 0.96 (mean content validity index of all items), indicating acceptable content validity. The approach adopted in this study ensured the face and content validity of the survey and enhanced the items’ relevance, concision, and clarity. Future validation is required to assess scale reliability and validity. The paper provides an overview of models used for determining acceptance and adoption of technology and describes in detail the methodology used to establish face and content validity of the questionnaire survey developed for assessing adults’ perceptions of automated vehicles.

Fully automated vehicles (AVs) hold promise toward providing numerous societal benefits including reducing road fatalities. However, we are uncertain about how individuals’ perceptions will influence their ability to accept and adopt AVs. The 28-item Automated Vehicle User Perception Survey (AVUPS) is a visual analog scale that was previously constructed, with established face and content validity, to assess individuals’ perceptions of AVs. In this study, we examined construct validity, via exploratory factor analysis and subsequent Mokken scale analyses. Next, internal consistency was assessed via Cronbach’s alpha (α) and 2-week test–retest reliability was assessed via Spearman’s rho (ρ) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The Mokken scale analyses resulted in a refined 20-item AVUPS and three Mokken subscales assessing specific domains of adults’ perceptions of AVs: (a) Intention to use; (b) perceived barriers; and (c) well-being. The Mokken scale analysis showed that all item-coefficients of homogeneity (H) exceeded 0.3, indicating that the items reflect a single latent variable. The AVUPS indicated a strong Mokken scale (Hscale = 0.51) with excellent internal consistency (α = 0.95) and test–retest reliability (ρ = 0.76, ICC = 0.95). Similarly, the three Mokken subscales ranged from moderate to strong (range Hscale = 0.47–0.66) and had excellent internal consistency (range α = 0.84–0.94) and test–retest reliability (range ICC = 0.84–0.93). The AVUPS and three Mokken subscales of AV acceptance were validated in a moderate sample size (N = 312) of adults living in the United States. Two-week test–retest reliability was established using a subset of Amazon Mechanical Turk participants (N = 84). The AVUPS, or any combination of the three subscales, can be used to validly and reliably assess adults’ perceptions before and after being exposed to AVs. The AVUPS can be used to quantify adults’ acceptance of fully AVs.