Day 1 :
University of Nevada, USA
Gregory P Brown has completed his BA in Psychology from Oberlin College, followed by Medical School at the University of Arkansas. He has obtained his Postgraduate training in General Psychiatry at Albert Einstein Medical Center in Philadelphia followed by Fellowship training in Forensic Psychiatry at the University of Rochester. He is presently an Associate Professor at the University of Nevada, School of Medicine, where he is also the Program Director for the Psychiatry Residency Training Program in Las Vegas. He is board certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology in the fields of Psychiatry and Forensic Psychiatry. His other professional focus is on forensic psychiatry. His interests range from models of psychotherapy and the mind to hypnosis, meditation and concepts of creativity.
Freud studied rejected the use of hypnosis with patients due to his desire to slow the development of transference. The science of hypnosis progressed to heights he would never have imagined through the work of three geniuses of the field: Milton Erickson, MD, George Estabrooks and David Elman. With new methods of induction, new concepts as to what hypnosis is, and sophisticated interventions, hypnosis could emerge as a psychotherapeutic science. The approaches of these three gentlemen could not have been more different, but each defined a piece of hypnosis and a specific induction method ideal for particular types of patients. Erickson pioneered a permissive approach to hypnosis using exquisite details of language patterns to lead patients into an inward focused state which he developed into trance. Estabrooks championed a highly authoritative approach still useful with individuals more rigid personality characteristics. Elman fashioned an induction pattern which leads to deep levels of trance reliably in less than three minutes so that the therapeutic time could focus on inner work rather than trance depth. Teaching the client to utilize these techniques on their own through self-hypnosis both gives them the power to control their inner states, but also gives them tools for relaxation, improved sleep, improved habit control and reduction of anxiety related symptoms. As we move into this next century, it is time to reconsider hypnosis as a tool for the psychiatrist, psychologist and psychotherapist.
Université Pierre et Marie Curie, France
Guy Hugues Fontaine has made 17 original contributions in the design and the use of the first cardiac pacemakers in the early 60s. He has serendipitously identified ARVD during his contributions to antiarrhythmic surgery in the early 70s. He has developed the technique of Fulguration to replace surgery in the early 80s. He has 900+ publications including 201 book chapters. He has been the Reviewer of 26 scientific journals both in basic and clinical science. He has served for 5 years as a Member of the Editorial Board of Circulation.
Background & Aim: A new technique of localized brain hypothermia to produce cooling by adiabatic gas expansion. Two approaches can be considered; fossa nasalis up to the nasopharynx and mouth up to the oropharynx. The purpose of this work is to compare the possible respective benefits, risks and limitations of these two methods.
Method: 22 cadavers mean age 77±11.4 SD (56-96) were studied at the School of Surgery in Paris. One case was not valid because of major clots in both fossa nasalis. Slightly curved brass tubes (4 mm Ø) were inserted perpendicular to the head axis in the two nostrils up to block. Depth of penetration in cm was measured on both sides of the nasal septum. Data were processed by Statistica v6.0. A p value≤0.05 was considered as significant.
Results: Depth of penetration was 10.8±1.47 (7-13) for the right nostril and mean 10.7±1.46 SD for the left nostril, this difference is not significant p=0.7. However, the difference in depth was 0.1±1.28 (-3.5-3.5). A difference ≥0.5 cm was observed in 6 cases (27%).
Conclusion: Mouth approach looks less aggressive than nasal approach for cooling the posterior part of the head and more specifically the brain for the treatment of out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). It could be performed by non-CPR trained bystanders with minimal training and therefore started before the intervention of EMS.
Discussion: Nose: fossa nasalis is closer to the brain; however, distortion of the nasal septum may reduce penetration in 27% of patients. This may explain that cases of epistaxis have been reported. In addition, if the angle of introduction is not perpendicular to the head axis as it should be but follows the direction of the nose a blockage occurs before entering the target area. This could reduce the effectiveness of cooling and subsequently the success of the method. Mouth: is easy to access, no block up to the oropharynx, can be used by a lay person with no training with no risk of injury. In addition mouth and tongue offer a large surface exchange area which can be important for general cooling (in addition to localized cooling) for the protection of the heart and other noble organs as the liver, kidney and the lungs. However, oropharynx is more distant from the brain than nasal cooling. Therefore cold produced will take longer to reach the brain area. This limitation can be counterbalanced by faster administration of cooling before EMS arrival in the field.
University Psychiatric Clinic Ljubljana, Slovenia
Karin Sernec is an Associate Professor at University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. She has earned her PhD in 2010 with thesis entitled “Anxiety, depression and aggression traits in anorexia and bulimia nervosa patients”. She has been the Head of Slovenia’s Unit for Treatment of Eating Disorders ever since it was founded in 1999. Together with her colleagues she built a multidimensional, mixed-gender inpatient treatment program in addition to group and individual outpatient treatment of persons with eating disorders. She is leading Slovenian Expert Group for Eating Disorders and continues to contribute to this field as an author and co-author of numerous scientific publications.
Until recently, eating disorders were a group of chronic mental disorders known only to a limited circle of professionals. Today, eating disorders are recognized as a significant contemporary medical problem in our society, even a public health issue. The etiological background of eating disorders is comprised of three major segments: Biological/genetic factors, socio-cultural factors and family environment. In most cases, there is a considerable overlap between these three. Eating disorders constitute: Anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder and recently emerged entities (orthorexia and bigorexia nervosa). Contrary to popular belief, eating disorders affect persons of all ages, genders and economic backgrounds. A key factor in successful outcome of an eating disorder is the patient’s own motivation for treatment. One of the most successful treatment approaches is psychotherapy, especially cognitive-behavioral, developmental-analytic and family psychotherapy. Pharmacotherapy is indicated in cases of comorbidity and is used as needed. The first line of treatment is on an outpatient basis. If that proves insufficient, an inpatient psychotherapeutic treatment is indicated. Recovery is not merely an absence of specific eating disorder symptoms, it means adequate psychosocial functioning.