ࡱ> q`  objbjqPqP .::f&"""""""6GGG86HlH6b^II"IIIJJJ$h("SJJSS""IIdddS "I"IdSdd`""II _MG^\-20bcPүbүү"qJRMdNT PJJJdXJJJbSSSS666D"z0666z0666"""""" RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, KARNATAKA BANGALORE ANNEXURE II PROFORMA FOR REGISTRATION OF SUBJECT FOR DISSERTATION 1Name of the Candidate and Address (in Block Letters)Dr. NITIN GOYAL S/o MR. M.L.GOYAL, HOUSE NO-1179 SECTOR-43 B CHANDIGARH-160022 2Name of the InstitutionJ.J.M. MEDICAL COLLEGE, DAVANGERE 577 004.3Course of the Study and SubjectPOSTGRADUATE M.D. IN RADIO-DIAGNOSIS4Date of Admission to Course1st JUNE, 20125Title of the TopicULTRASOUND AND MRI CORRELATION OF ROTATOR CUFF INJURIES.6BRIEF RESUME OF THE INTENDED WORK 6.1 Need for the Study: Rotator cuff disease is one of the most common causes of shoulder pain. In addition to history and physical examination, evaluation of a patient with shoulder pain often involves assessment of the rotator cuff with a diagnostic test such as high resolution ultrasonography or MRI2. Several radiological techniques have been used to detect tears of the rotator cuff. Each has limitations and no clear consensus on the optimum diagnostic study has emerged1. The radiological diagnosis of rotator cuff tears has traditionally been performed with arthrography and more recently with ultrasonography and MRI3.  Arthrography is quite accurate in detecting complete tears but it is an invasive procedure with some associated risk and discomfort, in addition it is insensitive to partial tears involving superficial surface or substance of the cuff. The diagnosis of partial tears, however, is important because many orthopedic surgeons will operate to relieve impingement of supraspinatus tendon before it progresses to full thickness tear. The relative ease with which they are seen on MRI suggests that MRI may have a role in their diagnosis3. MRI can provide information about rotator cuff tears such as tear dimensions, tear depth or thickness and tear shape, involvement of adjacent structures (eg, rotator interval, long head of biceps brachii tendon etc) and muscle atrophy, all of which have implications for rotator cuff treatment and prognosis. Information about coracoacromial arch and impingement as it relates to rotator cuff tears can also be obtained with MRI4. Although non-invasive, MRI is considerably more expensive than ultrasonography and will probably not replace it as a screening procedure for those trained in its use. For those cases in which the sonogram yields indeterminate results or in those institutions in which no one is trained to do sonography of the shoulder, MRI may be a useful screening test3. The major disadvantages of MRI are the long examination time, expense and that the study may be unsuccessful in very large or claustrophobic patients5. Ultrasonography is effective for detecting tears of the rotator cuff. The size of the tears can be classified and the findings used as a basis for management decisions1. Ultrasonography can also reveal the presence of other abnormalities that may mimic rotator cuff tear including tendinosis, calcific tendinitis, subacromial subdeltoid bursitis, greater tuberosity fracture and adhesive capsulitis7. Ultrasonography of rotator cuff is quick and painless. There is no risk of infection and in contrast to arthrography there is no discomfort following the procedure8. The simplicity, rapidity, low cost and accuracy of the examination make it especially attractive as a screening and presurgical staging study1. Arthrography appears to be more accurate in diagnosing rotator cuff injuries than either MRI or ultrasound but that benefit must be set against the invasiveness and potential discomfort to patients. Ultrasonography is as accurate as MRI for both full thickness and partial thickness tears, these results combined with low cost for ultrasound suggests that ultrasound may be the most cost effective imaging method of screening for rotator cuff injuries provided that the examiner is trained in this operator dependent technique. For practitioners without ultrasound expertise, MRI can be used. Arthrography can be performed in those cases in which ultrasound and MRI are not definitive6. Thus a study design for evaluation of role of USG and MRI in rotator cuff injuries and correlation of their findings. 6.2 Review of Literatures: Both USG and MRI are widely used for evaluation of shoulder joint pathology and essentially obviate the need for conventional arthrography. The first article about the use of USG in the assessment of rotator cuff was published in 1979 by seltzer SE, Finberg HG and Weissman BN, that for MRI in 1986 by Kneeland JB, Carrea GF and Middleton WD. Technical improvements coupled with advances in understanding of anatomic and pathological characteristics of the rotator cuff, have resulted in the maturation of these two modalities. J.G Smith (1984) first describes the rotator cuff tears in his report published in the London medical gazette. He described a series of traumatic rotator cuff ruptures in seven patients9. Codman EA was the first to perform the surgical repair of the rotator cuff. In 1911 he published the tendon repair results in two patients. He proposed the pathogenesis of cuff tears as traumatic. He published his classic book The Shoulder IN 1934. In 1934 Codman published that of his 30 clinically diagnosed rotator cuff tears; only 21 cases had tears at surgery10. Fred Moseley H and Ian Goldie (1963) studied the arterial pattern of rotator cuff and suggested that the morphological pattern of arteries in the rotator cuff does not produce any evidence that the critical zone for ruptures and calcified deposits is much less vascularised than any other part of the tendinous cuff. But showed conclusively that the critical zone of the rotator cuff corresponds to the zone of anastomoses between the osseous and tendinous vessels. They also described that the age does not seem to have a decisive influence on the morphological pattern of the arteries11. Dennis S Weiner and Ian Macnab(1970) studied the acromio-humeral interval in sixty normal and fifty-nine shoulders with known rotator cuff tears. Wherein, they found the acromio-humeral interval to range between seven to fourteen millimeters and narrowing was a frequent finding in rotator cuff tears. An interval of five millimeters or less was considered compatible with a tear and was due to upward migration of humeral head because of action of deltoid muscle, following a complete tear of supraspinatus12. Kenneth Mugde M et al (1984) studies eight patients with shoulder pain, one with bilateral involvement, who had a rotator cuff tear and an associated lesion delineated roentgenographic a separate fragment of the acromian that was believed to be an ununited ossification centre of the acromian( os acromiale). It was thought unlikely that such an association is coincidental because it appeared that patients showed an abnormal motion existed the site of fibrous union of the acromian and may have contributed to the impingement of the acromian on the rotator cuff. Six patients underwent repair of the rotator cuff with removal of the loose fragment of the acromian13. Jeffrey R. Crass (1985) did a study on patients with shoulder pain, who underwent bilateral shoulder USG and found that ultrasonography was more reliable than arthrography in the diagnosis of the normal rotator cuff. They found no patients to have a normal sonographic pattern in patients who had an abnormal surgical exploration. However, they found calcified and postoperative tendon as major diagnostic pitfalls8. William D. Middleton et al (1985) studied thirtynine consecutive patients referred for shoulder arthrography, underwent shoulder sonography to determine the ability of sonography to detect rotator cuff tears. Fifteen patients has arthrographically proven rotator cuff tears. Of these, fourteen were detected by sonography, with a sensitivity of 93%. Three sonographic criteria indicative of rotator cuff tear were postulated: Discontinuity in the normal homogenous echogenicity of the rotator cuff. Replacement of the normal homogenous echogenicity by a central echogenic band; and Non-visualization of the rotator cuff. Out of the thirty-nine patients, twenty patients had normal sonographic examinations, nineteen of which were normal by arthrography. Therefore the predictive value of negative sonogram was 95%. They described focal thinning of rotator cuff has a 100% predictive value in diagnosing rotator cuff tears. Discontinuity in the homogenous echogenicity of the rotator cuff is another sonographic finding of rotator cuff tear14. Thomas D. Brandt (1989) conducted a retrospective and prospective evaluation of clinical usefulness of shoulder sonography, which was done with ninety-eight patients having rotator cuff tears. Sixty-two patients underwent double contrast arthrography on the same day as sonography, and thirty-eight patients underwent surgery after sonography. Rotator cuff injuries have been classified as incomplete or complete ruptures. A comparison of sonography with surgery, using this study criteria, demonstrated a sensitivity of 57% and specificity of 76%. Complete ruptures are further classified as (a) pure transverse tears (b) pure vertical or longitudinal tears, (c) tears with retraction of tendon edges, (d) massive avulsion of the cuff (global tear)15. Soble MG (1989) described the major sonographic diagnostic criteria for diagnosing rotator cuff tear, which included (a) a well defined discontinuity usually visible as a hypoechoic focus within the cuff, (b) non-visualization of the cuff and (c) an echogenic focus within the cuff. In his study seventy-five patients underwent both sonography and arthrography. Compared with arthrography alone, ultrasound examinations enabled detection of 92% of rotator cuff tears (24 of 26 tears), with a specificity of 84% and a negative predictive value of 95%. Correlation was obtained in 30 of these patients who underwent surgery for rotator cuff tear or otherwise soft tissue abnormality. In this group, the sensitivity of sonography for detection of a tear was 93%, with a specificity of 73%, while for arthrography, sensitivity was 87% and specificity was 100%16. Burk DL Jr and his associates (1989), in their prospective study, examined 38 patients with suspected rotator cuff tears at 1.5 T MRI and the findings were compared prospectively in a blinded fashion with positive results from double contrast arthrography in all 38 patients, high resolution sonography in 23 patients and surgically in 16 patients. MRI and arthrography are comparable both in sensitivity and specificity. In the study sonography was not accurate as were the other two techniques. These results suggest that MRI should be considered as the non-invasive test of choice for patients with suspected rotator cuff disease5. Timothy E., Farle Christian H., Neumann Lynn S., Steinabah Arlon (1992) studied the MRI findings in full thickness tears of the rotator cuff and conclude that interruption of the tendon continuity is the most specific MRI finding of full thickness rotator cuff tears, while subacromial fluid is the most common finding17. Kumagai, H. Ito and Kubo A. (1994) performed sonography on 41 patients with symptoms referable to rotator cuff. Sonography was performed immediately after MRI, so that the information obtained by MRI could be applied to sonographic diagnosis. Twenty patients were diagnosed from T2-weighted images as having complete tears of the rotator cuff. Sonography showed full thickness anechoic area in 12 0f the 20 patients, heterogeneous hyperechoic areas in 12, but no abnormal findings in the other one. Thirteen patients were diagnosed as having incomplete tears with MRI. Sonography showed heterogeneous hyperechoic areas in 12, but no abnormal findings in one of the 13. Hyperechoic areas in the rotator cuff were shown in four of eight patients who had been diagnosed from T2-weighted images as not having tears. They considered anechoic areas to be specific findings of complete tears, although some patients with rotator cuff tears did not show this finding18. Van Moppes FI (1995) determined the accuracy of USG in the detection of rotator cuff tears. In his prospective study of 41 patients, the ultrasound results could be compared with the combined results of CT arthrography, arthroscopy and operation. The sensitivity of sonography in the detection of partial and total rotator cuff tears was 86%, the specificity 91%, the positive predictive value 96% and the negative predictive value 73%19. Mary S. Hollister et al (1995) retrospectively reviewed the preoperative shoulder sonography reports of 163 patients for the presence of fluid in the subacromial-subdeltoid bursa or glenohumeral joint. Sixty seven (41%) of the 163 patients had joint effusion, bursal fluid or both. Joint effusion alone was seen in 35 patients. Fourteen of these had a normal rotator cuff at surgery, and 21 had a rotator cuff tear (sensitivity, 22%; specificity 79%; positive predictive value 70%). In 22 patients fluid was seen in both the bursa and the joint, 21 had surgically proven rotator cuff tears (sensitivity 22%; specificity 99%; positive predictive value 99%). The sonographic finding of intra-articular fluid alone (without bursal fluid) has both low sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears. However, the finding of fluid in the subacromial-subdeltiod bursa especially when combined with a joint effusion is highly specific and has a high positive predictive value for associated rotator cuff tears20. Marnix T.van Holsbeeck et al (1995) tested previously defined ultrasound criteria for identification of partial thickness tears of the rotator cuff. 52 patients were examined. The criteria used to detect partialthickness tears of the rotator cuff were (a) mixed hyper and hypoechoic lesion visualized in two orthogonal imaging planes with either articular or bursal extension. The sensitivity of USG in depicting partial thickness tears was 93% and specificity was 94%21.  Urwin M, Symmons D, Allison T, Brammah T, Busby H, Roxby M et al (1998) predicted the burden of shoulder disorders in the community. They concluded that rotator cuff tears tend to prevail in the dominant arm and occupational history may reveal heavy lifting or repetitive movements, especially above the level of the shoulder22. Wallny T (1999) from Germany developed a sonographic index to diagnose rotator cuff tears. Ratio of the thickness of the biceps tendon to the thickness of the supraspinatus tendon, of more than 0.8 is considered diagnostic of rotator cuff tear23. Shalene A. Teefey (1999) stated that shoulder ultrasonography was improving over the last decade, with the advent of high frequency probes. He emphasizes on musculoskeletal anatomy, sonographic technique, normal sonographical anatomy, pathophysiology of rotator cuff and bicep tendon disease and sonographic findings of rotator cuff tears24. Martin Hervas .C and his associates in another study (2001), who examined all painful shoulders in 1998 by subjecting them to USG and MRI, have stated that the diagnosis of full thickness rotator cuff tears was highly specific on both imaging techniques (100% for USG and 97.1% for MRI) but was not as sensitive using USG (67.9% for USG and 75.5% for MRI). Thus they concluded that USG should be a good imaging technique based on its specificity for the initial study of all painful shoulder joints. But the low sensitivity makes it necessary to undertake an additional MRI25. Bryant L. et al (2002) compared the ability of clinical estimation, diagnostic USG, MRI and arthroscopy to estimate the size of rotator cuff tears. Estimates of rotator cuff tear size were compared with findings at open operation in 33 consecutive patients with a presumptive diagnosis of rotator cuff tear. Arthroscopy of rotator cuff tear size correlated best with actual tear size (Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.92; p<0.001). MRI (r = 0.74; p<0.001) was similar to USG( r = 0.73; p<0.001).26  William D. Middleton et al (2004) one hundred and eight cases of shoulder pain that had a clinically suspected rotator cuff tear and these patients underwent both USD and MRI and filled out satisfaction surveys after both tests and the results of satisfaction scores were higher for USG in 54 patients, higher for MRI in 13 patients and the same for both in 50 patients (p<0.001). All patients were willing to repeat USG but 10 patients were not willing for MRI (p<0.002). Ninety-three patients preferred sonography, eight patients preferred MRI and 17 patients had no preference and concluded that most patients with shoulder pain prefer USG to MRI27. Zlatkin MB et al conducted MRI studies on painful shoulder. They reported that the rotator cuff tears in 51% of the patients were associated with type 3 acromia, os acromiale or antero-inferior bone spurs. They also diagnostic performance of MRI in rotator cuff tears and reported sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 91%, 88%, and 89% respectively for all rotator cuff tears, partial and complete using conventional MRI28. Vlychou M et al (2009) conclude in their study of 56 patients with symptomatic impingement syndrome, of which all patients underwent USG and MRI scans prior to surgical intervention. Both imaging modalities detected successfully 44 cases of partial tears of supraspinatus tendon. USG imaging yield a sensitivity of 95.6%, a specificity of 70%, an accuracy of 91% and a positive predictive value of 93.6%. The corresponding values for MRI were 97.7%, 63.6%, 91%, and 91.7% respectively. USG imaging can be considered almost equally effective in detecting partial tears of the rotator cuff compared to MRI, particularly located in the area of the supraspinatus tendon. MRI may be reserved for doubtful or complex cases, in which delineation of adjacent structures is mandatory prior to surgical intervention29. 6.3 Objectives of the Study: Evaluation of role of MRI in rotator cuff injuries. Evaluation of role of high resolution ultrasound in rotator cuff injuries. Correlation of high resolution ultrasound findings with MRI findings.7.MATERIALS AND METHODS 7.1 Source of Data: The main source of data for the study are patients from the following teaching Hospital attached to Bapuji Education Association, J.J.M. Medical College, Davangere. Bapuji Hospital. Chigateri General Hospital. Appropriate MRI sequences and multiplanar imaging and ultrasonogram will be performed for every patient TECHNIQUE: Imaging will be done with 1.5 Tesla Philips achieva machine using shoulder coil the following sequences will be selected as required Coronal oblique T1W/ proton density weighted (PDW) fast spin echo (FSE) sequence. Coronal oblique fat suppressed (FS) PDW FSE / T2 W FSE sequence. Sagittal oblique T2 W FSE sequence (with / without fat suppression). Axial T2 W gradient echo (GE) sequence. Axial PDW FSE (with / without fat suppression) Field of view 14-16 cm, slice thickness 2-3 mm and matrix 512 x 512. 7.2 Method of Collection of Data (including sampling procedure if any): All patients referred to the department of Radio diagnosis with clinically suspected rotator cuff injuries in a period of 2 years from Nov 2012 to November 2014 will be subjected for the study. Initially a minimum of 30 cases are intended to be taken up, however the scope of increasing the number of cases exists depending upon the availability within the study period.Inclusion criteria: The study includes All patients with clinical suspicious of rotator cuff injuries. Cases of all age groups irrespective of sex Exclusion criteria: The study will exclude Patient having history of claustrophobia. Patient having history of metallic implants insertion, cardiac pacemakers and metallic foreign body insitu. Duration of study: 2 years. Data Analysis: Proportion study. 7.3 Does the study require any investigations or interventions to be conducted on patients or other humans or animals? If so please describe briefly. YES. The study is mainly based on investigations as Radiology itself is a tool of Investigation. . The study involves only humans. Informed consent would be taken after explaining about and before any procedure. Routine investigations, laboratory investigations, Ultrasonogram and MRI. 7.4 Has ethical clearance been obtained from your institution in case of 7.3? Yes. Ethical clearance has been obtained from the Research and Dissertation Committee/ Ethical Committee of the institution for this study  8LIST OF REFERENCES Stephen N. Wiener, William H. Seitz, Jr. Sonography of the shoulder in patients with tears of rotator cuff: Accuracy and value for selecting surgical options. AJR. Jan 1993;160:103-107. Sharlene A. Teefey, William D. Middleton, William T. Payne, Ken Yamaguchi. Detection and measurement of rotator cuff tears with sonography: Analysis of diagnostic errors. AJR. June 2005;184:1768-1773. J.Bruce Kneeland, William D.Middleton, Guillermo F. Carrera, Robert C. Zeuge, Andrzej Jesmanowicz, Wojciech Froncisz, James S. Hyde. MR Imaging of the shoulder; Diagnosis of rotator cuff tears. AJR. August 1987;149:333-337. Yoav Morag, Jon A. Jacobson, Bruce Miller, Michel De Maeseneer, Gandikota Girish,David Jamadar. MR Imaging of rotator cuff injury: What the clinician needs to know. Radiographics 2006;26:1045-1065. D. Lawrence Burk, Jr, David Karasick, Alfred B. Kurtz, Donald G. Mitchell, Matthew D. Rifkin, Cynthia L. Miller, David W. Levy, John M. Fenlin, Arthur R. Bartolozzi. Rotator cuff tears: Prospective comparison of MR Imaging with Arthrography, Sonography and Surgery. AJR July 1989;153:87-92. Joseph O. De Jesus, Laurence Parker, Andrea J. Frangos, Levon N. Nazarian. Accuracy of MRI, MR Arthrography, and Ultrasound in the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears: A Meta-analysis. AJR. June 2009;192:1701-1707. Josh B. Moosikasuwan, Theodore T. Miller, Brian J. Burke. Rotator cuff tears: Clinical,Radiographic and US findings. Radiographics. 2005;25:1591-1607 Jeffrey R. Crass, Edward V. Craig, Carl Bretzke, Samuel B. Feinberg. Ultrasonography of the rotator cuff. Radiographics. November 1985;5:941-953. Smith JG.Pathological appearances of seven cases of injury of the shoulder joint with remarks. London Med Gazette1834;14:280-285. Codman EA. Complete rupture of supraspinatus tendon:operative treatment with report of two successful cases. Boston Med Surg J 1911;164:708-710. Moseley HF. The arterial pattern of the rotator cuff of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg 1963;45B:780-789. Weiner DS and Ian Macnab: Superior migration of the humeral head. A radiological aid in the diagnosis of tears of rotator cuff.1970;52(3):524-527. MK Mugde, V Wood, and GK Erykman. Rotator cuff tears associated with os acromiale. J Bone Joint Surg.1984;66:427-429. William D. Middleton, Gerald Edelstein, William R. Remus, G. Leland Melson, William G. Totty, William A. Murphy. Sonographic Detection of rotator cuff tears. AJR . Feb 1985;144:349-353 Brandt TD, Cardone BW, Grant TH, et al . Rotator cuff sonography: A Reassessment. Radiology.1989;173(2):323-327. Soble MG, Kaye AD and Guay RC. Rotator cuff tear:clinical experience with sonographic detection. Radiology.1989;173(2):319-321. Farley TE, Christian NH, Lynn et al. Full thickness tears of the rotator cuff of the shoulder: Diagnosis with the MRI.AJR. 1992;158:347-351 Kumagai, H Ito and Kubo A. Sonographic findings of rotator cuff tears: correlation with MRI imaging. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi. 1994;54(6):459-464. Floris I. van Moppes, Onno Veldkampb, Jan Roordab. Role of shoulder ultrasonography in the evaluation of the painful shoulder. Eur J Radiol.1995;19:142-146. Hollister MS, Mack LA, Patten RM, et al:Association of sonographically detected subacromial/subdeltoid bursa effusion and intra-articular fluid with rotator cuff tear.AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995 Sep;165(3):605-608. Van Holsbeeck MT, Kolowich PA, Eyler WR, et al. US depiction of partial thickness tear of the rotator cuff. Radiology. 1995;197:443-446. Urwin M, Symmons D, Allison T, Brammah T, Busby H, Roxby M, et al. Estimating the burden of musculoskeletal disorders in the community: the comparative prevalence of symptoms at different anatomical sites and the relation to social deprivation. Ann Rheum Dis.1998;57:649-655. 23. Wallny T, Wagner UA, Prange S, Scmitt O, Reich H. Evaluation of chronic tears of rotator cuff by ultrasound. J Bone Joint Surg. 1999;81:675-678. Shalene A. Teefey, WD. Middleton, Ken Yamaguchi. Shoulder sonography:state of the art. 1999:37(4):767-785. Martin Harvas C, Romero J, Navas-Acien A, Reboiras JJ, Munuera L. Ultrasonographic and MR imaging of rotator cuff lesions compared with arthroscopy or open surgery findings.J Shoulder Elbow Surg.2001;10(5);410-415. Bryant L, Shiner L, Bryant C, Murrell GA. A comparison of clinical estimation, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopy in determining the size of rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow.2002 May-June;11(3):219-224. William D. Middleton, William T. Payne, Sharlene A. Teefey, Charles F. Hildebolt , David A. Rubin, Ken Yamaguchi. Sonography and MRI of the shoulder:comparison of patient satisfaction. AJR. 2004;183:1449-1452. Zlatkin MB. Rotator cuff tears, diagnostic performance of MRI. Radiology 1989;172:223-229. Vlychou M, Dailiana Z, Fotiadou A, Papanagiotou M, Fezoulidis IV, Malizos K. Symptomatic partial rotator cuff tears: diagnostic performance of ultrasound and Magnetic resonance imaging with surgical correlation. Acta Radiol.2009;50(1):101-105.  9Signature of Candidate 10Remarks of the Guide Study is viable since the study is non invasive which helps in proper patient management.11Name and Designation of (in block letters) 11.1 Guide 11.2 Signature 11.3 Co-Guide (if any) 11.4 Signature 11.5 Head of Department 11.6 Signature  Dr. J PRAMOD SETTY MD PROFESSOR AND HEAD, DEPARTMENT OF RADIO-DIAGNOSIS, J.J.M. MEDICAL COLLEGE, DAVANGERE 577 004. Dr. J .PRAMOD SETTY M.D., PROFESSOR AND HEAD, DEPARTMENT OF RADIO-DIAGNOSIS, J.J.M. MEDICAL COLLEGE, DAVANGERE 577 004. 1212.1 Remarks of the Chairman and Principal 12.2 Signature      PAGE  PAGE 15 ?@     * B C Y { {wpgp` hCJ\hXCJH*\ hXCJ\hhCJmHsHhmHsH h(hh(hXh(CJmHsHhXhCJmHsHh(h5 h5\ hX5\ hX5aJhzhXCJaJhXCJaJ hzhXhX hCJ h5 h5CJ%@N dh$IfgdX $IfgdX $$Ifa$gdX d$IfgdX dh$IfgdX d$Ifgdr$dhd$Ifa$gdXgdz$dha$ n o   * C X zodYKdhd$Ifgd( d$Ifgd( dd$If $d$Ifa$kd$$IflFD1K$0 %R    4 laX Y [ { xj_TLd$If dd$If dhd$If$dhd$Ifa$kd$$Ifl6FD1K$0 %R    4 la zlaV dhd$If dhd$If$dhd$Ifa$kdT$$IflFD1K$0 %R    4 la zi^i d$IfgdX$dhd$Ifa$gdXkd$$IflFD1K$0 %R    4 la  ! # E ^ N ^ u v w x # $ % & "#)*+,ִִִֽhXhHhNNaJ hVphXB*CJH*aJphh7^hXCJH*h hXCJhrhrCJhrhXCJH* hrCJ hXCJhThXCJh hCJhX5CJaJ h5CJ7 ! # E ^ x zl^R?$dh$If`a$gdX dh$Ifgd( dh$Ifgd($dh$Ifa$kd$$IflFD1K$0 %R    4 lax & NB $dh$Ifa$tkdL$$Ifl40DK$#0 %R4 laf4$$If`a$gdr$dh$If`a$gdr$dh$If`a$gdX,Lj^K$dh$If`a$gdX $dh$Ifa$tkd$$Ifl40D#"0 %4 laf4 $IfgdX$dh$If`a$gdXIJKLrWXZ!!!!####Z%[%]%^%`%õëëõÆõyjh@hXB*CJaJphh7^hXCJPJaJh@CJPJaJh@ehThXCJh7^h7^CJH*PJaJh7^CJPJaJh7^hXCJH*PJaJhXCJPJaJh h7^5h hX5hX hXCJh7^hXCJH* h7^CJh hXCJ)LrZ$dh$If`a$gdX$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gd7^ $If`gdX $IfgdX$dh$If`a$gd7^!#]%~dO77$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gd7^%$dh$If`a$gd7^$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gdX $dh$Ifa$tkd|$$Ifl40D#"0 %4 laf4]%^%_%`% 'T''uiO88$ & F)dh$7$8$H$Ifa$gd7^$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gdX $dh$Ifa$tkd$$Ifl40D#"0 %4 laf4%$dh$If`a$gdX''v)h,i,$$7$8$H$If`a$gdX$.dh$7$8$H$If`.a$gd7^$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gd7^$ & F)dh$7$8$H$Ifa$gd7^`%Q)p)r)v)J*c,e,g,h,i,k,=.>.////////>2?2A233k45ּscSsJh#>>>>>%@'@AAA AsBuBDDD޿տտտտտտտտտ秡h7^h7^CJH*aJh7^CJaJh7^hkCJH* hkCJh Th TCJPJaJh7^h7^CJH* h7^CJ h TCJh7^h TCJH*h#~hPP=$dh$If`a$gd7^$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gd7^$dh$7$8$H$Ifa$gd7^ $dh$Ifa$tkdD$$Ifl40D#"0 %4 laf4>>>>)@!ApdUF$dh$Ifa$gd7^$dh$Ifa$gdk $dh$Ifa$tkd$$Ifl40D#"0 %4 laf4$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gdX!AwBDFFFDI_PA$dh$Ifa$gd`$dh$Ifa$gdktkdt$$Ifl40D#"0 %4 laf4$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gd`$dh$If`a$gd7^DFFFFFF(H)HHHHH!I@IBICIJJJNNNN:N;NoNOOOO/Oɽxl`Wh@h`6aJh@h`65CJaJh`6h`65CJaJh`h`CJaJh`CJaJh`5CJaJhkh`5CJaJ hAnn5aJh`h`5H*aJh`h`5aJh7^hkCJH*aJh7^CJaJhkCJaJh@eh Th`h`CJaJh7^h`CJH*aJh`CJaJDIJN;NoNNOOLtkd $$Ifl40D#"0 %4 laf4$ & Fdh$Ifa$gd`$dh$Ifa$gd` $Ifgd`$dh$If`a$gd`OOO/OOOPkPvPPPQ|kkX$ & F*dh$Ifa$gdr$dh$Ifa$gdk$dh$If`a$gdk$ & F dh$If^a$gdk$ & F dh$If^a$gdk$dh$If`a$gdk $Ifgd$dh$Ifa$gd$dh$Ifa$gd`6 /OOOOO5PGPjPkPuPvPPOQPQQQQQQQQR5R6R{R|RRRSȽwk\QhrhrCJaJh@h@B*CJaJphh@h@5CJaJh hrCJ\aJhrhrCJ\aJmH sH hrhrCJ\aJhrCJ\aJhkCJ\aJh hkCJ\aJhk5CJ\aJhdJhk5CJ\aJhkCJaJhkCJPJaJhAnnhkCJPJaJhAnnhkCJaJPQQQR6R|RRSkT$dh$If`a$gdr$dh$If`a$gdr$dh$Ifa$gd@$hdh$If^ha$gdr$ & F*dh$Ifa$gdrSSSiTjTkTlTmTTTTTUU*U+UUUUUUUUUɷ喎|k\kNBhgmB*CJaJphhr5B*CJaJphh@h@B*CJaJph h@h@5B*CJaJphhSBCJaJhAnnhr5\hAnnhr5#h@h@5>*B*CJaJphhr5>*B*CJaJph#h@hr5>*B*CJaJph h5CJ h`65hrhrCJ\ hrCJhAnnhrCJaJhrCJaJh@CJaJkTlTmTTTTUU|paJJp$ & F!dh$If^a$gdr$dh$Ifa$gdr dh$Ifgd@dh$Ifgd`6tkd$$Ifl40D#"0 %4 laf4U+UUUUUVVVWXXXXXrr$dh$If`a$gd@ $Ifgd@$dh$If`a$gdr$dh$Ifa$gdrd$If^d`gdAnndh$Ifgdrdh$Ifgd@$ & Fdh$Ifa$gdr $Ifgdr UUUVVV)WIWyWzWWWWXX?X^XXXXXXXXXXXXsYtYǿǿǿǿǞ~ocoXPhrCJaJhWhrCJaJh`CJaJmHsHh[~hrCJaJmHsH h5CJh! hCJh@h@B*CJaJphh@B*CJaJph hrCJh@hrh[=CJaJhrCJaJhAnnhrCJaJhAnn h@h@5B*CJaJphhgmB*CJaJphhrB*CJaJphXXXXXXXdVN$If$dh$Ifa$tkd< $$Ifl40D~$:#0 %4 laf4$dh$Ifa$gd@$dh$If`a$gd@XuY>Z[[]]p^___&$dh$If[$\$^a$gdA $ & F+dh$Ifa$gdr tYuY ZZ[[~[[\\]]]O^p^^_____e___`,````jaaaaabb%bEbFbbô꜔}rjrjrjbjh`CJaJhrCJaJh@hrCJaJh`CJaJmHsHh%)hrCJaJhrCJaJh[~hrCJaJhA h/ hCJh@hA B*CJaJphhA B*CJaJphhP)hrCJaJmHsHhrCJaJmHsHhP)hrCJaJhP)hrCJaJ&____``aaFbb8ccwddddddddd$ & F+dh$Ifa$gd`$dh$Ifa$gd`vkd $$Ifl4.0D#t"0 %4 laf4 bb7c8c]cccbddddeeeeeeeedfefxgyg hhh!h"h#hyhzhQiRi|i:j;jkk³tltl]tltlhP)hrCJaJmHsHh`CJaJhP)hrCJaJh`h`CJaJh`CJaJmHsHh`h`CJaJmHsHhrh/ hA 5CJhA hA B*CJaJphhA 0J,B*CJ]aJphh`hrCJaJmHsHh`hrCJaJmH sH hrCJaJh`CJaJ$cddeeeeeeee[vkdp $$Ifl4.0D#t"0 %4 laf4&$dh$If[$\$^a$gd`$ & F+dh$Ifa$gd` eeefyghzhRi;jkkk`lalblcl$hdh$If^ha$gd`$ & F+dh$Ifa$gd`$dh$Ifa$gd` kjkkk@l_l`lalblcldlelfllllmmmmmmnnnnnnzuof\R\Hh[~hJ5CJhJh! 5CJhJh5CJh[~hJCJ hJCJ hJ5hj\hJ5hJ5CJaJ hJ5CJhA h! CJaJhJCJaJ h5CJ h/ h h/ h0 h/ hr5CJh`CJaJh`CJaJh`hrCJaJh`hrCJaJh`h`CJaJhP)hrCJaJcldlhllllymdm $Ifgdx dh$Ifgdx$dh$Ifa$gdxvkd $$Ifl4.0D#t"0 %4 laf4llllllzk__S $$Ifa$gdO  dh$Ifgdx$dh$Ifa$gdxkd $$IflF$ 0 %    4 lalllm%m0m1m2m3mzkbVVVVV dh$Ifgdx $Ifgdx$dh$Ifa$gdxkdP $$IflF$ 0 %    4 la3m4mCmDm[m\mkmlmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmnn dh$IfgdJ $IfgdJ d$IfgdJ dh$Ifgdx $Ifgd/ nnnnnnnn3nGnfn~nnn $IfgdJ $Ifgd/ dh$Ifgdx n n,n-n2n3nfnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnooooo o o oǺ~rjr]rj~hJ0JCJmHnHuhJ0JCJjhJ0JCJUhJ hJ0JjhJ0JUh.jh.U h8h'l h5CJhXh5CJmHsHh[~hJCJmHsH hJCJh[~hJ5CJH*h[~hJ5CJhvrhJ5CJaJmHsHh[~hJ5CJaJ nnnnnnnnnnzkbVVVVVV dh$Ifgdx $Ifgdx$dh$Ifa$gdxkd $$IflF$ 0 %    4 la nnnnnnnnnnnnlcaaaaa`gd4`kd $$Ifl F$ 0 %    4 la dh$Ifgdx nnnnnnno o o o o`gd4`&`#$ ,&P . A!"#$% $$If!vh555#v#v#v:V l0 %R5554$$If!vh555#v#v#v:V l60 %R5554$$If!vh555#v#v#v:V l0 %R5554$$If!vh555#v#v#v:V l0 %R5554$$If!vh555#v#v#v:V l0 %R5554$$If!vh55##v#v#:V l40 %R55#4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55"#v#v":V l40 %55"4f4$$If!vh55:##v#v:#:V l40 %55:#4f4$$If!vh55t"#v#vt":V l4.0 %55t"4f4$$If!vh55t"#v#vt":V l4.0 %55t"4f4$$If!vh55t"#v#vt":V l4.0 %55t"4f4$$If!vh55 5#v#v #v:V l0 %55 54$$If!vh55 5#v#v #v:V l0 %55 54$$If!vh55 5#v#v #v:V l0 %55 54$$If!vh55 5#v#v #v:V l 0 %55 54/8@8 Normal_HmH sH tH 8@8  Heading 1$@&CJH@H Heading 2$$dh@&a$5CJJ@J Heading 3$$dh@&a$ 56CJB@B Heading 4$dh@&5CJH@H Heading 5$$dh@&a$5CJD@D Heading 6$$dh@&a$CJH@H Heading 7$$dh@&a$5CJ>@> Heading 8$dh@&CJ< @< Heading 9 $@&5CJDA@D Default Paragraph FontVi@V  Table Normal :V 44 la (k@(No List TC@T Body Text Indent$dh`a$CJBQ@B Body Text 3$dha$CJ>B@> Body Text$dha$CJFP@"F Body Text 2$dha$5CJ4 @24 Footer  !.)@A. Page Number\R@R\ Body Text Indent 2$dh`a$CJ\4@b4 Header  !BOrB Ifulltext-authorCJaJZOZ JG blackregular2(56:CJOJQJ\]aJo(phBOB z Char Char2CJ_HmH sH tH fOf @eDefault 7$8$H$1B*CJOJPJQJ^J_HaJmH phsH tH TOT @eList Paragraph ^CJPJaJnHtH8O8 @eapple-style-spanBOB @eapple-converted-space.X@. Emphasis6]TT Ann Balloon Text CJOJPJQJ^JaJnHtHXX Ann Char Char,CJOJPJQJ^J_HaJmH nHsH tHJ^@J Ann Normal (Web)!dd[$\$CJaJ6U@!6 Ann Hyperlink >*B*phNO2N '!articledetails#dd[$\$CJaJ*W@A* '!Strong5\DORD @ auth_list%dd[$\$CJaJBObB @citation&dd[$\$CJaJ@Or@ @authors'dd[$\$CJaJ,O, @ pagination.O. @ ej-j-source O @name(O( @slug-vol,O, @ slug-pages0a0 @ HTML Cite6]4O4 Xcit-print-date g@N*CXY[{ !#E^x& ,     L rZ]^_` Tv!h$i$j$k$'A*+---I/156666)8!9w:<>>>DABF;FoFFGGGG/GGGHkHvHHPIIIJ6J|JJKkLlLmLLLLMM+MUMMMNNNOPPPPPPPPPPPuQ>RSSUUpVWWWWWWXXYYFZZ8[[d\]]]]]]]]]e^y_`z`Ra;bckc`dadbdcdddhddddddddddde%e0e1e2e3e4eCeDe[e\ekeleeeeeeeeeeeeeeefffffffff3fGfff~fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffg g g g00(0@0N 0N0N0N 0N0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N0N 0N 0N 0N 0N0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N%0N0N0N%0N 0N 0N 0N) 0N) 0N) 0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N!0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N 0N 0N0N0N0N* 0N* 0N* 0N* 0N* 0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N0N! 0N! 0N0N0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N&0N&0N 0N 0N + 0N+ 0 N+ 0 N+ 0 N+ 0 N+ 0 N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N&0N&0N&0N&0N&0N 0N 0N + 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N000 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 0 0 00000 000000 0 0@0I00@0I00@0I00@0I00@0@0@0@0@0@0I00@N*CXY[{ !#E^x& ,     L rZ]^_` Tv!h$i$j$k$'A*+---I/156666)8!9w:<>>>DABF;FoFFGGGG/GGGHkHvHHPIIIJ6J|JJKkLlLmLLLLMM+MUMMMNNNOPPPPPPPPPPPuQ>RSSUUpVWWWWWWXXYYFZZ8[[d\]]]]]]]]]e^cdddddddff g 00*0@0N0N0N0N 0N0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N%0N0N0N%0N 0N0N 0N) 0N) 0N) 0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N!0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N 0N 0N0N0N0N* 0N* 0N* 0N* 0N* 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N! 0N! 0N0N0N 0N 0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N&0N&0N0N 0N+ 0N+ 0 N+ 0 N+ 0 N+ 0 N+ 0 N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N+ 0N@+ 0N&0N&0N&0N&0N&0N0N 0N+ 0NK0040 K00\40 K00\40 K0040 0 %%%( `%5D/OSUtYbkn o8?CHJNQSVY[^d X x L]%'i,5>!ADIOPQkTUXX_ceclll3mnnnn o9;<=>@ABDEFGIKLMOPRTUWXZ\]_`abcefg o: !(!!8@0(  B S  ?*(  ( Ď( p(d( ̅!(Dy( *(*((D( |(d(A( *(dA(i((4(4((\X( (TH(,y(4&(}(r( $(<9(M(( lO((H((Q( (8(l~(,(?(y 66?8?8DADALAGGGGGGGGGGGIIBVBVWWX)\]] ^ ^ccceeee g      !"$#%&(') ??F8F8KANATAGGGGGGGGGHHIIDVDVWWX/\]]^^ccceeee g     !"$#%&(')9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsStateB#*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-regionZ**urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceNamehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/Z(*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceTypehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/h&*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity0http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsV'*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplacehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/ Ի**('&'&#''&*'*(*'(*'*(''#'&'''&#''&*'*(*BCX_n}*7oq* , ;  % ~ 0 ; L X " lw7=PW&+:BDFGP5=4C[g GX2>y  E Q !(!H!S!!!d"p"""""-#7#k$p$$$% %e%n%%%%%%%7'A'''''((((+)7)y))M*R*r*{*|**S+^+++++++_,j,,,2-=-----$./.M/S/0#0S0]0R1\111112 2333333V4l45 5 555566^6g6k6q666666777*808S8^888!9(9,929O9^9999:I:T:::@@DAKAAAAAAAAABBCDzEEGGGGGGGG!H,H9HFHHHIIIIIJMMOOPPPPPuQ}QQQQQ RRS~SSTTTTTTU6U=U?UDUHUPUfUrUUUUU(V=VOVpVVVVW WWeWWWWWWXXmXqXXXYY0Y7Y\Y^Y_YhYjYYYYYYYYY ZRZYZ}ZZZZZZZZ[ [8[>[Q[U[[[[[0\5\6\>\?\E\G\M\d\\\\\\&]4]8]G]Q]g]]]]]]]]]]]]^e^j^n^u^^^^^}________``` `I`Y```````````a)aRa|aaadblbpbvbbbbbbbcckcrcvc~ccccccccc@dDd f,ffffffffffffffff g g*BCW7>CFL#_#--99[>_>??AADD8GXGYKeKUMdMPPgQoQ R=R>RRSSS~SSSSTTUUU0V=VOVoVVWeWWWW XXvX~XY YjYY+Z0ZOZYZZZZZ'[+[?\M\S\V\d\\\\(]4]W^_^l_s_``S`Y`Ra|aab+b.bablbbbbc#c.c]cecPdSdff}f~ffffffffffffff g g3333333333333333333333333333333333333333*Y[{!#--p>>F;FFGGHPIImLLLLMNPPZQuQ R>RSSSSTUUUOVpVVWeWWWX`XXjYY1ZFZZZ[8[O\c\\]H^e^Z_y__``&`Ra|a b;bbcOckcfdddd\eeeefffffffffffffffff g gffffffffffff g g+elެa}8"}=Zp %N^G% r>x $ ",1|7t ެX`9+Hr>xK 2m m^ ;x!ެ-I%F0{C*d*aP+ p,HB+,&h0pdS5ϦF;tmD>~p%[>Ģr;A |cC:EdT H%N8N ;Q `%U M1V,(4X$[a wambr`_oެOo,(y5q isn9w3yey D088^8`o(- ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o l ^l `OJ QJ o( < ^< `OJQJo( ^ `OJQJ^Jo(o ^`OJ QJ o( ^`OJQJo(|^|`OJQJ^Jo(o L^L`OJ QJ o(^`OJPJQJ^J)^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.h hh^h`OJQJo(h88^8`.hL^`L.h  ^ `.h  ^ `.hxLx^x`L.hHH^H`.h^`.hL^`L.hh^h`o(.hh^h`o(.^`o()^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.88^8`o(- ^`CJaJo(.^`.pL^p`L.@ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PL^P`L.hh^h`o(. hh^h`OJ QJ o( hh^h`OJQJo( hh^h`OJ QJ o(88^8`o(- ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o p^p`OJ QJ o( @ ^@ `OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o ^`OJ QJ o( ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o P^P`OJ QJ o( ^`B*o(ph) ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH. hh^h`OJQJo(hh^h`o(.^`o()^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.hh^h`o(.^`o()^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH. ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o p^p`OJ QJ o( @ ^@ `OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o ^`OJ QJ o( ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o P^P`OJ QJ o( ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o p^p`OJ QJ o( @ ^@ `OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o ^`OJ QJ o( ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o P^P`OJ QJ o(h hh^h`OJQJo(h 88^8`OJQJo(oh ^`OJ QJ o(h   ^ `OJQJo(h   ^ `OJQJo(oh xx^x`OJ QJ o(h HH^H`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJ QJ o( hh^h`OJQJo(hh^h`o(.4^4`.^`. L^ `L. ^ `.t^t`.DL^D`L.^`.^`.L^`L.hhh^h`.h88^8`.hL^`L.h  ^ `.h  ^ `.hxLx^x`L.hHH^H`.h^`.hL^`L. hh^h`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo( hh^h`OJ QJ o(hh^h`o(. V^V`OJQJo(&^&`OJQJ^Jo(o  ^ `OJ QJ o(  ^ `OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o f^f`OJ QJ o( 6^6`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o ^`OJ QJ o( hh^h`OJQJo(^`CJOJQJaJo(hH  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJ QJ o(hH  ^ `OJQJo(hH||^|`OJQJ^Jo(hHoLL^L`OJ QJ o(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJ QJ o(hH88^8`o(-hh^h`o(. hh^h`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o p^p`OJ QJ o( @ ^@ `OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o ^`OJ QJ o( ^`OJQJo(^`OJQJ^Jo(o P^P`OJ QJ o(^`o(.^`. L^ `L.` ^` `.0^0`.L^`L.^`.^`.pL^p`L. ^ `PJo(.^`.L^`L.| ^| `.L^L`.L^`L.^`.^`.L^`L.+^G% KHM1Vel;x!m^`%U r;A;QaaP+8N`_oy5q|cCp, h02mOo$ +, Hp %[>dS5wameyisE4Xa}1|7><_z>-I%F;0{C*n9w=X`++         6p;                 2v                 x @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @                  2v                                                                                Zm                 ` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @:Sf        ?BB8B8% nId 2I { ;)D nGV x?%@yJ :0"{ c %YY;)GV "#*Thk t8x? 2I @yJt8BgLnId9yM"#*YY%%zQYYc % t`QYYThkBgL%%zQjlS! v # ) ?- / 0 q1@25 0'O S'"(j:*B Z#A&)x)D*+ BSB[B94D>EJG9HJ08M@NpOVRYS T :W:UWRgWXY7\^7^N_`4`@eRg'lgm\nAnnqn qq0q}r9s>s(vw})t}*7~s)'!>p8HJIBujF3#fRW#Wh&VA n&6x(Gjx86Ui=4x*WmrNN*& \}0FnU1I0+(:^ekArXk;.(zUXqZ%]>p*XY[{ !#   ^_`i$j$k$---666>>>GGGkLlLmLPPPWWW]]]cdddhdddddddddefffffffffff g g@ff2Wff@{ g@Unknown Gz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial7.@ CalibriI& ??Arial Unicode MS7&  Verdana;SimSun[SO5& zaTahoma?5 z Courier New;Wingdings"1h+Fe *ef18[W4[W4Y4dff2QHP?(25RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, BANGALORESiddeshUser+                           ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * Oh+'0 , L X d p|8RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, BANGALORESiddeshNormalUser305Microsoft Office Word@Ps@ D@6& @--[W՜.+,0  hp  IIHT4f 6RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, BANGALORE Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghjklmnoprstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F)iMData i1TableqWordDocument.SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q