High Standard Double Nine Serial Numbers

The High-Standard Double Nine revolver is a double-action nine shot Western style revolver introduced in 1958. The original revolver had an aluminum frame, a rebounding hammer, and barrel lengths between 3.5 inches to 9.5 inches. The model was available in both blue and nickel finish, and the grips were either white or black plastic, faux stag or walnut. High Standard manufactured a number of variants of the Double Nine; originally the Longhorn, Natchez and Posse, and later the Hombre, Durango and Marshal. They were distinguishable by different features (example: the Natchez had a "birds head" grip and 4.5" barrel). Sears sold the gun as the J.C. Higgins Ranger or Model 90, and later also as the Ranger De Luxe. High Standard also made western style revolvers for Western Auto and Kroydon Arms. In 1971 High standard introduced a new version of the Double Nine (the W106 series) that had a steel frame which was strong enough to be used with .22 Magnum rounds. This model series was collectively known as the Convertible and came with two separate cylinders for use with .22 LR and .22 Magnum. These guns were available in the later variants along with the new High-Sierra, and were the first models available with adjustable sights as an option. The Double Nine was discontinued in 1984. Mechanically the Double Nine was the same as the Hi-Standard Sentinel Revolver, meaning that unlike the Single Action Army on which it was aesthetically based it had a swing-out cylinder therefore the ejector rod and housing (on those models fitted with it) was purely ornamental.

Previously, we reported enhanced P3 amplitudes to between-category deviations among high and low probability events. Here, we tested the effects of a within-category difference. Subjects performed a go/no-go button press task as they viewed repeated, randomly-ordered presentations of nine double-digit numbers. Eight numbers fell within a prescribed range (42-49, standards); prior to testing, subjects selected one standard number for later recall. A ninth, out-of-range (91, deviant) number was also included. Subjects were tested under two conditions, in which they responded either to one (low response probability) or to seven (high response probability) standard nonselected numbers, designated as targets. Relatively larger P3s were consistently apparent only when the deviant nontarget was associated with a low probability response to a nontarget. There was a selective effect of nontarget response probability on P3 amplitude to the deviant nontarget. Our results indicate that within-category deviation detection is facilitated by "controlled" attention to the structure of the stimulus field.

Download File 🔥 https://urllie.com/2y1KkA 🔥

Currently, many haematologists and oncologists prefer to transfuse their patients with high doses of platelets in order to avoid high-grade bleeding with the postulation that a high dose will result in less frequent transfusions and improved outcome. The low-dose strategy was shown by Riley to be less costly than using a standard or high dose12; however, the study in which this was demonstrated only involved inpatients without taking into consideration outpatients who can have a huge impact on costs12,13. Many studies have focused on the incidence of bleeding as the primary outcome when investigating different dose strategies, but few have studied platelet characteristics following the same dose strategies.

In 1973, Roy and his colleagues conducted one of the first trials that investigated the outcome of platelet transfusions in relation to dose5. The study included 62 children with acute leukaemia: 30 received a high platelet dose of 0.06 units/lb and 32 patients received a lower dose of 0.03 units/lb which corresponds to the standard dose currently used today. Whole blood-derived platelet transfusions were given if the platelet count was 25109/L or less. The high-dose group had 16 bleeding events out of 167 transfusions with an incidence of 9.6%, whereas the low-dose group had 9 bleeding events out of 141 transfusions with an incidence of 6.3%; this difference was not statistically significant. However, the incidence of severe bleeding was similar in both study groups. The mean platelet increment at 1 hour was higher in the high-dose group (25.1109/L vs 17.4109/L in the low-dose group) but the increment at 24 hours did not differ significantly (0.9109/L vs 1.2109/L). They authors concluded that a dose of 0.03 units/lb can be given safely without there being a significant difference in the incidence of bleeding compared to that in patients given high doses5.

In 1999, Klumpp et al. conducted a multicentre, randomised, double-blind trial to study the clinical consequences of low-dose compared to high-dose platelet transfusion in patients undergoing haematopoietic progenitor stem cell collection16. Forty-sixadult patients were enrolled in the study and each received transfusions of apheresis platelets in pair alternating between the low dose and the high dose. The threshold for transfusion was a platelet count less than 15109/L and the difference was considered significant if p

In 2004, Tinmouth et al.conducted a phase II study of 111 adult patients with acute leukaemia or undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation18. Fifty-sixpatients received a low dose of three whole blood-derived platelet units and 55 patients received the standard dose of five units and were observed daily for the effectiveness of low-dose platelet transfusions in preventing bleeding complications and reducing platelet utilisation. Patients with platelet counts less than 10109/L were transfused. It was observed that the incidence of major bleeding events was 10.7% in the low-dose group (6 out of 56 patients) compared to 7.3% in the standard dose group (4 out of 56 patients) and two of these major bleeding events occurred in patients in the transplant group with a platelet level greater than 100109/L. Patients who received the standard dose had an increase in the incidence of minor bleeding events (40% vs 19.6%) and an increase in the total number of days with bleeding (64 days vs 34 days). There was no difference between the two groups in the median duration of platelet support (4.5 days vs 4.0 days). The standard dose group received fewer transfusions (147 vs 164 times) but the number of units used was higher (685 vs 521 whole blood-derived units). The 24-hour post-transfusion median platelet increment (14109/L vs 7109/L) and the median transfusion-free interval (3 days vs 2 days) were higher in the standard-dose group. An increase in the median number of days with a platelet count less the 10109/L was only seen in the acute leukaemia group who received the low dose. The authors of this study concluded that low-dose platelet transfusions are safe and have the advantage of reducing platelet utilisation by approximately 25 percent but stated that larger randomised controlled trials on this subject were still needed18.

In 2005, Sensebe et al. conducted the multicentre Prospective Randomized Open Blinded End point (PROBE) study in which 101 patients with acute leukaemia or undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation were enrolled19. Fifty patients received a standard dose of platelets consisting of 0.571011/10 kg and 51 patients received the high dose with a mean number of platelets of 0.961011/10 kg. Apheresis platelet concentrates were given when the platelet count was less than 20109/L and P values

It is expected that using a lower platelet dose will increase the number of transfusions required and shorten the interval between transfusions; thus, in a given period of time the patient requires more transfusions and this may translate into a major increase in hospitalisation costs. On the other hand, the low-dose strategy may decrease the mean total number of transfused platelets, as reported by Hersh and his colleagues, because the period of thrombocytopenia will be shorter22. This could be explained by the fact that using a high dose will suppress thrombopoetin and thus prolong the thrombocytopenic period. So patients managed with the low-dose strategy will require frequent transfusions within a determined period but because the duration of thrombocytopenia will be shorter, they will require fewer numbers of transfused platelets compared to those subjects managed with a high-dose strategy. Our hypothesis concerning the duration of thrombocytopenia was not confirmed by these trials because two of them (the one by Tinmouth et al. and the STOP trial) showed a longer duration of thrombocytopenia with the low-dose strategy (4.5 vs 4 days and 15.8 vs 14 days, respectively, with p=0.28) while this information was not indicated in the remaining articles.

Taking into account the frequent transfusions required in the low-dose group, hospitalisation costs increase greatly even if hospitals charge the patient per single platelet-unit rather than on a platelet-concentrate basis. This was confirmed by Ackerman et al. who analysed the data from the study by Klumpp et al. from a hospital perspective13. According to Klumpp et al., a 38% reduction in the platelet dose, from the standard dose, would result in a 45% reduction in the mean platelet count increment and consequently result in frequent transfusions. This study included only transfusion of platelets obtained by apheresis and not whole blood-derived platelets16. Ackerman et al. estimated that, following transplantation, a patient will require a mean number of eight low-dose transfusions vs five high-dose transfusions (p=0.05). After taking into account all cost components, including labour, supplies and adverse events, they estimated that using a low-dose strategy would cause a 60% increase in the median hospital predicted platelet transfusion cost per patient (4,486 USD vs 2,804 USD; p=0.05) as well as an increase in the number of donors to which the patients are exposed. The majority of the costs were associated with supplies, which included the platelet component, platelet filter, transfusion kit and premedication (4,288 USD out of 4,486 USD for low-dose transfusions and 2,680 USD out of 2,804 USD for the high-dose transfusions). The nursing costs of administering the platelets was included in the labour costs along with the time for blood bank personnel, medical technician, and physician and were not significant compared to the cost of supplies (163 USD for the low-dose and 102 USD for the high-dose strategy). Thus, using a higher dose and single donor platelet transfusion strategy, hospitals would save approximately 1,682 USD per patient taking into consideration that they charge per apheresis unit13. be457b7860