The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of sumac and turmeric on performance, egg quality traits, and blood parameters of laying hens. Forty Lohman Brown hens at 30 weeks of age were distributed into four groups, consisting of five replicates with two hens in each. The experiment lasted for 42 days. Laying hens were fed different basal diets in treatment groups and control groups. The groups consisted of hens fed a basal diet with 0.5% sumac, a basal diet with 0.5% turmeric, and a basal diet with 0.25% sumac + 0.25% turmeric. Hens were given ad libitum access to feed and water during the experiment. The results revealed that there were no statistically significant differences in terms of final body weight, egg production, egg weight, and feed intake after the groups were fed according to the diets as 0.5% sumac, 0.5% turmeric, and 0.25% sumac + 0.25% turmeric. Addition of turmeric increased egg production and egg weight, but reduced the feed conversion ratio compared with the control group. On the other hand, dietary supplementation with sumac decreased egg weight. Shape index, yolk index, albumen index, Haugh unit, and yolk color parameters were also not affected by dietary supplementation of turmeric and sumac. When layers were fed the 0.25% sumac + 0.25% turmeric-supplemented diet, yolk index was higher in number, but Haugh unit and albumen index were lower. Dietary addition of sumac and turmeric does not have any negative influence on performance and egg quality traits of laying hens. Dietary treatments do not significantly affect blood serum cholesterol, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels. With the supplementation of turmeric, AST and ALT levels are higher in number among all the groups. Dietary sumac and turmeric can be added at 0.5% level to laying hen rations without changing animal performance.

Our findings suggest that SD blunts cardiovascular autonomic response, and consequences of this relation might be more pronounced in subjects who are exposed to sleeplessness regularly or in subjects with baseline cardiovascular disease.

PURPOSE:To assess the cost-effectiveness of a ceramide-infused skin barrier (CIB) versus other skin barriers (standard of care) among patients who have undergone ostomy creation.DESIGN:Cost-effectiveness analysis, based on a decision-analytic model that was estimated using data from the ADVOCATE (A Study Determining Variances in Ostomy Skin Conditions And The Economic Impact) trial, which investigated stoma-related healthcare costs over 12 weeks among patients who recently underwent fecal ostomy, and from other sources.SUBJECTS AND SETTING:Analysis was based on a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients who recently underwent fecal ostomy; over a 1-year period, 500 patients were assumed to use CIB and 500 were assumed to use standard of care.METHODS:We adapted a previous economic model to estimate expected 1-year costs and outcomes among persons with a new ostomy assumed to use CIB versus standard of care. Outcomes of interest included peristomal skin complications (PSCs) (up to 2 during the 1-year period of interest) and quality-adjusted life days (QALDs); QALDs vary from 1, indicating a day of perfect health to 0, indicating a day with the lowest possible health (deceased). Subjects were assigned QALDs on a daily basis, with the value of the QALD on any given day based on whether the patient was experiencing a PSC. Costs included those related to skin barriers, ostomy accessories, and care of PSCs. The incremental cost-effectiveness of CIB versus standard of care was estimated as the incremental cost per PSC averted and QALD gained, respectively; net monetary benefit of CIB was also estimated. All analyses were run using the perspective of an Australian payer.RESULTS:On a per-patient basis, use of CIB was expected over a 1-year period to result in 0.16 fewer PSCs, an additional 0.35 QALDs, and a savings of A$180 (Australian dollars, US $137) in healthcare costs all versus standard of care. Management with CIB provided a net monetary benefit (calculated as the product of maximum willingness to pay for 1 QALD times additional QALDs with CIB less the incremental cost of CIB) of A$228 (US $174). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was also completed; it revealed that 97% of model runs resulted in fewer expected PSCs with CIB; 92% of these runs resulted in lower expected costs with CIB.CONCLUSIONS:Findings suggest that the CIB is a cost-effective skin barrier for persons living with an ostomy.