1. Introduction {#sec1-ijerph-16-04607}
===============

The definition of pain as given by the International Association for the Study of Pain is "an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage, or described in terms of such damage" \[[@B1-ijerph-16-04607]\]; it is also described as "a distressing experience associated with the mentioned actual or potential tissue damage with sensory, emotional, cognitive and social components" \[[@B2-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Abdominal pain (AP) may be acute or chronic. Since a uniform terminology is required in patients with acute AP, in order to clarify findings and to facilitate comparison between different studies, the following definition for acute AP has been introduced: "Pain of non-traumatic source with a maximum length of 5 days" \[[@B3-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Chronic AP, although frequent, is difficult to define. The predisposing factors are inadequately understood and the pathogenesis is unclear; the prevailing opinion in pathophysiology emphasizes the inter-relationship between alterations in hypersensitivity and changed motility, with many associated risk factors \[[@B4-ijerph-16-04607]\].

Acute AP is one of the commonest causes of admission to the emergency department (ED) of tertiary hospitals \[[@B5-ijerph-16-04607],[@B6-ijerph-16-04607],[@B7-ijerph-16-04607],[@B8-ijerph-16-04607]\]. AP can have several medical and surgical causes, both gastrointestinal (GI) and non-GI, and its assessment and management in the ED should be rapid and accurate \[[@B4-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Diagnostic procedures may be challenging, even for experienced clinicians, since the range of differential diagnosis is wide and a combination of history, radiological, clinical as well as laboratory evaluation is mandatory. Furthermore, any delay in diagnosis and potential initiation of treatment might influence the outcome and prognosis \[[@B5-ijerph-16-04607],[@B8-ijerph-16-04607],[@B9-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Special populations like the elderly, immunocompromised patients \[[@B5-ijerph-16-04607]\] and patients with foreign linguistic and cultural backgrounds \[[@B10-ijerph-16-04607]\] demand additional attention, since the clinical presentation and history may be atypical or even misleading and this may give rise to misdiagnosis of abdominal pathologies.

In recent decades, a continuously increasing number of migrants and refugees from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have arrived in Europe to strive for a better future \[[@B11-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Moreover, there has been a substantial increase in admissions to EDs of LMIC patients claiming symptoms of acute AP \[[@B12-ijerph-16-04607],[@B13-ijerph-16-04607]\]. The different cultural, genetic, linguistic as well as sanitary background of these patients from LMIC---or poorer countries---has an impact on the different stratification of pathologies and percentages that are seen in the ED and this tendency influences the sociodemographic structures, including EDs \[[@B14-ijerph-16-04607]\].

Among European countries, Switzerland has the highest rates of permanent foreigners. In 2017, 2,108,001 migrants (24.8%) were documented according to the Swiss Federal Statistical Office \[[@B12-ijerph-16-04607]\]; this must be compared with Europe's mean migrant contingent of 7.3% to 8.6%, and Switzerland supports the highest contingent of foreign population, with 23.5% \[[@B15-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Psychological stress, self-medication (laxatives, cocaine), sexual abuse and even uncommon infectious diseases (e.g. tuberculosis, human immunodeficiency virus, histoplasmosis and others) are frequent causes of AP in migrants \[[@B15-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Immigration-specific features are also evident in the interpretation of symptoms: Not every "AP" is really AP and, thus, it is critical to make the distinction between organic, functional, and psychological AP. This distinction can be in the setting of the patient's overall situation and the clinician may need help from members of the same cultural group or a skilled interpreter.

Recent evidence supports the concept that functional AP, for instance, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), might be attributed to vitamin D deficiency (VDD), particularly when there is no anatomical--organic correlation or other explanatory pathology \[[@B16-ijerph-16-04607],[@B17-ijerph-16-04607],[@B18-ijerph-16-04607],[@B19-ijerph-16-04607],[@B20-ijerph-16-04607]\]; VDD is associated with more severe AP, increased scores for the severity of IBS symptoms, and lower quality of life in IBS patients \[[@B21-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Moreover, the specific religious or stylistic habits of Muslim patients \[[@B22-ijerph-16-04607]\] as well as patients of African \[[@B23-ijerph-16-04607],[@B24-ijerph-16-04607]\] and middle East origin \[[@B25-ijerph-16-04607],[@B26-ijerph-16-04607]\] may have an impact on the exposure of skin to the sun and may explain why these patients have a well-documented predisposition to developing VDD \[[@B22-ijerph-16-04607],[@B23-ijerph-16-04607],[@B24-ijerph-16-04607],[@B25-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Therefore, it would be of interest to investigate whether unclear AP (UAP) is associated with VDD.

The main aim of our retrospective case-control study was to investigate VDD in patients presenting with UAP to the ED of Bern University Hospital (commonly known as the Inselspital). The secondary aim was to investigate whether demographic parameters affect the potential association between vitamin D status and UAP.

2. Materials and Methods {#sec2-ijerph-16-04607}
========================

2.1. Study Design {#sec2dot1-ijerph-16-04607}
-----------------

We performed a retrospective single-center case-control study including patients presenting at the ED of Inselspital Bern with symptoms or/and signs of AP from 1 January 2013 to 31 August 2016. Inselspital ED serves both as a tertiary referral center (Level 1) and primary care facility, and provides medical services to an area of about two million citizens; in 2017, approximately 46,000 adult patients were admitted as emergencies to the ED \[[@B27-ijerph-16-04607]\].

### Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

We included patients aged \>16 years from LMIC who presented to the ED with UAP. Exclusion criteria were the presence of structural abdominal pathologies, such as pancreatitis, cholecystitis, cholangitis, acute hepatitis, and bowel obstruction (ileus); urological/renal disorders (including infection, lithiasis); gynecological, oncological, or rheumatological disorders; transplantation (heart, kidney, liver, lungs); alcohol/drug intoxication; presence of postoperative abdominal adhesions; acute coronary syndrome; and patients with elevated inflammation markers (C-Reactive protein, CRP, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, ESR, leucocytes) and/or fever, suggestive of acute infection. Moreover, patients taking vitamin D or calcium supplements were not included as well as pregnant women and patients with psychosis. Patients were also excluded if they had not been subjected to additional necessary examinations.

For the control group, we recruited participants from the same sampling pool (LMIC), with available vitamin D status, without abdominal pain, who presented with panic attacks and/or palpitations in ED. The controls were matched (1:1) with cases for age, gender, and body mass index (BMI). The exclusion criteria for the control group were the same as for the patients.

2.2. Data Collection and Extraction {#sec2dot2-ijerph-16-04607}
-----------------------------------

Records of patients upon admission to the ED are registered in the clinical application E.care for Windows (E.care BVBA, ED 2.1.3.0, Turnhout, Belgium). This medical database enables instantaneous recall of past diagnostic reports, consultations, X-rays, and other relevant medical documents. Additionally, multiple filters of E.care database were applied, including time frame, age, medical/surgical cases, and LMIC. Country of origin along with information on resident status were retrieved by the hospital administration and recorded in the hospital information system (SAP).

The following parameters were extracted from the charts of included patients: Demographics (age, gender), type of transport to the ED (e.g., by ambulance), triage, date of admission and discharge, medical history, symptoms and their duration, laboratory findings, radiological findings (including abdominal computer tomography and/or ultrasound, where needed), treatment provided, type of discharge from the ED (e.g., inpatient admission, outpatient therapy), length of hospital stay, and outcome (e.g., complications, mortality).

Patients were routinely triaged in the Inselspital by using the Swiss Emergency Triage Scale \[[@B28-ijerph-16-04607]\]. The latter is an abbreviated version of the validated Manchester Triage System \[[@B29-ijerph-16-04607]\]. This triage system stratifies the urgency of treatment for patients presenting to an ED by the five following levels: 1: Acute life threating problem (immediate treatment required); 2: High urgency; 3: Urgency; 4: Less urgency; and 5: No urgency. Once a new patient had been admitted to the ED, a specially trained nurse assigned the patient's reported complaints according to a defined algorithm and then determined the treatment priority with the aid of fixed rules that also consider the vital signs.

All patients who presented to the ED during the mentioned time frame were extracted from E.Care to an Excel sheet (Microsoft^®^ Excel for Mac 2019, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, US) for further analysis. Patients with AP were identified by using the following search strings in the patient "diagnosis list" column: "Abdomen" (also in German) and "Bauch" (in English translated colloquially as "belly"). The resulting cases were further manually investigated by two authors (M.D. and A.P.), a s explained in [Figure 1](#ijerph-16-04607-f001){ref-type="fig"} and [Figure 2](#ijerph-16-04607-f002){ref-type="fig"}. An in-depth manual investigation was performed by M.D. with the retrieval of detailed procedures when necessary, such as radiological or endoscopic findings. Validation of the extracted data was performed by D.S.S. In cases of disagreement, a consensus was achieved by the intervention of a senior author (A.K.E.).

2.3. Definition of Economies {#sec2dot3-ijerph-16-04607}
----------------------------

According to the World Bank \[[@B30-ijerph-16-04607]\] for the current 2019 fiscal year, "low-income economies were defined as those with a gross national income (GNI), calculated using the World Bank Atlas method, of \$995 or less in 2017; lower middle-income economies were included those with a GNI per capita between \$996 and \$3895; upper middle-income economies were those with a GNI per capita between \$3896 and \$12,055; and high-income economies were those with a GNI per capita of \$12,056 or more".

The countries of origin were grouped as defined by the origin classification of the United Nations \[[@B31-ijerph-16-04607]\].

2.4. Vitamin D Estimation {#sec2dot4-ijerph-16-04607}
-------------------------

The serum levels of 25-OH-cholecalciferol (25OHD) were measured by certified commercial laboratories using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry and the MassChrom® 25-OH-Vitamin D3/D2 diagnostics kit (ChromSystems, Munich, Germany). The intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV) was \<5% and interassay CV was \<6%. In accordance with previous guidelines for the definition of vitamin D status, calcifediol concentrations \<50 nmol/L were defined as VDD \[[@B32-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Severe VDD was defined as concentration \<25nmol/L. On 1 September 2016, the vitamin D analysis was switched from liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to a chemiluminescence immunoassay. In order to enhance homogeneity and to facilitate the interpretation, we included cases and controls with measured 25OHD up to 31 August 2016. If multiple values of vitamin D were found, the first value was taken, as this was closest to UAP.

2.5. Ethical Considerations {#sec2dot5-ijerph-16-04607}
---------------------------

This descriptive retrospective study was carried out in compliance with the last revision of the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki \[[@B33-ijerph-16-04607]\] as well as Swiss law and was approved by the cantonal (district) ethics committee in Berne (Kantonale Ethikkommission Bern, Ref. No. KEK-BE: 010/ 2016). According to the ethics committee, written informed consent was unnecessary, due to the retrospective nature of the study and the fact that our cases and controls were completely anonymized.

2.6. Statistical Analysis {#sec2dot6-ijerph-16-04607}
-------------------------

Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) or as frequencies, for continuous or categorical variables, respectively. The normality of distributions of continuous variables was checked by the Kolmogorov--Smirnov test. A comparison of continuous variables was performed with independent samples, using the t test or the Mann--Whitney test. A comparison of categorical variables was performed with the chi-square test or the Fischer exact test. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed to adjust between group comparisons for potential cofounders. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 21.0 for Macintosh (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Significance was set at *p* \< 0.05 (two tailed).

3. Results {#sec3-ijerph-16-04607}
==========

During the period 2013--2016, a total of 10,308 cases from LMIC were reported in the ED of Inselspital. After applying the algorithm described in detail in [Figure 1](#ijerph-16-04607-f001){ref-type="fig"} and [Figure 2](#ijerph-16-04607-f002){ref-type="fig"}, a total of 223 cases were identified with UAP. Of these, 27 patients had available data of vitamin D status in our records. Seventeen of these were women ([Table 1](#ijerph-16-04607-t001){ref-type="table"}). A control group of 27 individuals of similar gender, age, and BMI were enrolled ([Table 2](#ijerph-16-04607-t002){ref-type="table"}). Fourteen UAP patients had severe VDD (defined as \<25 nmol/L), whereas only one participant from the control group exhibited severe VDD. This difference was statistically significant (*p* = 0.001, [Table 3](#ijerph-16-04607-t003){ref-type="table"}). If the cut-off value for VDD was raised to 50 nmol/L), the difference between UAP patients and the control group remained significant (*p* = 0.024, [Table 3](#ijerph-16-04607-t003){ref-type="table"}).

However, UAP patients had mean levels of 25OHD similar to the control group (41.26 vs. 53.67 nmol/L, respectively), and the difference just failed to reach statistical significance (*p* = 0.060) ([Table 2](#ijerph-16-04607-t002){ref-type="table"}).

An attempt was made to identify the region of origin for all participants (n = 54; [Table 4](#ijerph-16-04607-t004){ref-type="table"}). The most common region of origin was Southern Europe (20.4%), followed by Southern Asia (16.7%) and Eastern Europe (13%). The continental distribution is depicted in [Figure 3](#ijerph-16-04607-f003){ref-type="fig"}. Within the triage system of Inselspital, most cases (37) were labeled as urgent, whereas only one case was non-urgent ([Figure 4](#ijerph-16-04607-f004){ref-type="fig"}). For LMIC patient in both groups, the most common form of admission was self-admission and the most common form of discharge was at home ([Table 5](#ijerph-16-04607-t005){ref-type="table"}).

In the sub-group analysis, there was no difference between the two groups regarding the season of blood collection for vitamin D. Likewise, there were no differences in vitamin D between patients and controls with respect to continent of origin, triage, or manner of admission (Supplement). In a further separate sub-group analysis in men and women, 25OHD levels were significantly lower in women with UAP than in women without UAP (*p* = 0.037, [Table 6](#ijerph-16-04607-t006){ref-type="table"}). In contrast, there were no significant differences between 25OHD levels in men with and without UAP.

4. Discussion {#sec4-ijerph-16-04607}
=============

To the best of our knowledge, this study showed for the first time that patients from LMIC who presented to ED with UAP had an increased prevalence of VDD. In general, pain of a functional nature, without any evidence of organic etiology, may be a manifestation of IBS. In this regard, abdominal pain associated with functional GI disorders occurs in a significant percentage of children and adolescents referred to gastroenterology clinics or ED; these disorders include IBS, migraine, functional dyspepsia, or psychiatric disorders \[[@B34-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Moreover, IBS appears to be a source of considerable burden and cost in the United States \[[@B35-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Therefore, management of such patients with VDD might be a cost-effective strategy, although this remains to be shown. This concept is supported by recent publications, as follows.

In a case-control study \[[@B19-ijerph-16-04607]\], 60 IBS patients (who fulfilled Rome III diagnostic criteria) were compared to 100 healthy individuals with respect to vitamin D status. It was shown that the IBS group exhibited significantly lower 25OHD levels relative to the control group. Moreover, 112 IBS adults with known VDD were randomly divided in two groups, one receiving placebo and one vitamin D supplementation. When compared with placebo, the group that had received vitamin D for 6 months showed a statistically significant improvement, as expressed by scoring systems \[[@B17-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Besides, a relevant experiment was performed by an Iranian research team, where soy isoflavones, vitamin D and placebo were administered in all different combinations to IBS adults and amelioration of severity scores was recorded \[[@B18-ijerph-16-04607]\]. In another study \[[@B21-ijerph-16-04607]\], 90 IBS patients and the same number of healthy controls were recruited. The IBS group exhibited enhanced incidence of VDD, more severe clinical symptoms, and raised IBS scores. Similar conclusions were drawn by another study group from the USA \[[@B16-ijerph-16-04607]\]; in a retrospective study with 55 children with IBS and 100 controls, it was shown that more than half of IBS patients had VDD \< 50 nmol/L and \>90% of IBS subjects had VDD \< 75 nmol/L (93% vs. 75%, *p* = 0.006). Moreover, IBS patients had significantly lower mean 25OHD. In a pediatric ED setting, Kehler et al \[[@B36-ijerph-16-04607]\] identified 89 children with VDD, the majority (83%) with severe VDD. The most common clinical manifestation for ED admission was abdominal pain and the most common ethnic origins were black African and Pakistani. In a second UK study, with a randomized, double-blind, three-arm design, placebo, vitamin D and probiotics were administered to IBS patients. The authors deduced that IBS patients demonstrate significantly lower levels of vitamin D and would benefit from screening and possible supplementation.

The impact of IBS on quality of life might be affected by 25OHD levels. Interestingly, VDD is strongly associated with functional problems in intestinal motility, accompanied by psychiatric disorders (anxiety and depression) that severely influence the quality of life of such patients. VDD and symptoms of anxiety and depression are frequently connected with chronic functional constipation provoked by disorders in intestinal motility. 25OHD serum concentrations should be routinely estimated in these patients and vitamin D supplementation may offer better control of intestinal motility and quality of life \[[@B37-ijerph-16-04607]\].

Aside from IBS, Whitehurst et al. reported two cases of unexplained chronic diffuse pain of the abdomen, pelvis, or extremities in the palliative setting, where VDD could be confirmed. After the substitution and normalization of vitamin D, both patients claimed that the pain was resolved \[[@B38-ijerph-16-04607]\].

Functional pain has also been reported extra-abdominally and associated with VDD. For instance, non-cardiac chest pain was associated with low levels of 25OHD in two studies \[[@B39-ijerph-16-04607],[@B40-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Additionally, migraine, another pathology without structural substrate, was also associated with VDD. In this respect, in a recent randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, supplementation of Vitamin D was shown to be superior to placebo in reducing migraine days \[[@B41-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Moreover, in a prospective case-control study, it was demonstrated that migraine had severe VDD compared to the control group and that there was a linear negative relationship between headache days and serum 25OHD levels \[[@B42-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Another study showed that a larger number of monthly days with headache was related to VDD among patients with migraine \[[@B43-ijerph-16-04607]\]. Lastly, comparable additional data on migraines and VDD has been reported in another case-control study from Iran \[[@B44-ijerph-16-04607]\].

Our study has certain limitations. These include the retrospective nature of the design and the relatively small number of subjects with UAP and available vitamin D status. However, this population largely consists of refugees and asylum seekers, so medical compliance is not always warranted and the patients do not stay long term in a single country; in our case, in Switzerland. Therefore, elective follow-ups with optimal care are not always feasible. Additionally, for the purpose of statistical analysis, the assumption that all subjects with vitamin D levels \<25 nmol/L have levels equal to 25 nmol/L may have influenced the statistical significance when mean vitamin D levels were compared between patients and controls. Furthermore, the results were not controlled for season. Lastly, a selection bias for the control group has to be acknowledged.

5. Conclusions {#sec5-ijerph-16-04607}
==============

For the first time, we report higher rates of VDD and severe VDD in patients with UAP than controls. Although the observational nature of our study cannot prove causality, accumulating evidence in the literature warrants mechanistic studies on the potentially contributing role of vitamin D to pain perception.

In our subgroup analysis, female, but not male, patients had significantly lower vitamin D levels than the respective controls, but this difference did not remain robust after adjustment for potential cofounders. Our results warrant studies with larger sample sizes as well as mechanistic studies to investigate the potential sexual dimorphism in vitamin D status in patients with UAP.

Nevertheless, the clinician should be particularly meticulous with patients from other cultural/geographical backgrounds suffering from UAP presented to the ED: Functional abdominal pain is an exclusion diagnosis (clinically, radiologically, interventionally, laboratory analyses). IBS could be a form of such pain. Vitamin D supplementation, when needed, is a simple regimen, which might offer a cost benefit for affected patients, but this remains to be shown.

Conceptualization, M.D., A.K.E. and D.S.S.; Data curation, M.D. and J.K.-R.; Formal analysis, M.D., A.P., S.A.P., S.S., J.K.-R., S.P. and D.S.S.; Investigation, M.D. and D.S.S.; Methodology, A.P., J.K., S.A.P., J.K.-R., M.P. and D.S.S.; Project administration, A.K.E. and D.S.S.; Resources, S.S., J.K.-R. and D.S.S.; Software, M.D., S.A.P., J.K.-R. and S.P.; Supervision, J.K., M.P., A.K.E. and D.S.S.; Validation, J.K., A.K.E. and D.S.S.; Visualization, S.S.; Writing---original draft, M.D.; Writing---review and editing, J.K., M.P., A.K.E. and D.S.S.; Review, editing and approval of the revised manuscript, M.D., A.P., J.K., S.A.P., S.S., J.K.-R., M.P., S.S., A.K.E. and D.S.S.

This research received no external funding.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

This study has been revised according to the STROBE checklist.

![Flow chart of the search procedure for the identification of eligible patients. C; cardiological cases, G; gastrointestinal cases, Gy; gynecological cases; I; infectious cases, LMIC; low- and middle-income countries, N; neurological cases; U; urological/renal cases, Trauma cases, V; various cases (such as; body packer, intoxications (including alcohol), suicide attempt, rheumatological, ORL, unclear thoracic pain-dyspnea, orthopedic without trauma, thrombosis etc.).](ijerph-16-04607-g001){#ijerph-16-04607-f001}

![Schematic representation of the chosen algorithm for case selection. AP; abdominal pain, ED; emergency department, CT; computer tomography, G; gastroenterologist, Gy; gynecologist, S; surgeon, U; urologist/nephrologist.](ijerph-16-04607-g002){#ijerph-16-04607-f002}

![Continental distribution of subjects.](ijerph-16-04607-g003){#ijerph-16-04607-f003}

![Swiss Emergency Triage Scale depicting the number of cases per category.](ijerph-16-04607-g004){#ijerph-16-04607-f004}

ijerph-16-04607-t001_Table 1

######

Percentages of genders per group.

                     Group    Total
  ------------------ -------- -------- -------- ---- ----
  Gender             Women    Count    13       17   30
  \% within gender   43.3%    56.7%    100.0%
  \% within group    48.1%    63.0%    55.6%
  Men                Count    14       10       24
  \% within gender   58.3%    41.7%    100.0%
  \% within group    51.9%    37.0%    44.4%
  Total              Count    27       27       54
  \% within gender   50.0%    50.0%    100.0%
  \% within group    100.0%   100.0%   100.0%

ijerph-16-04607-t002_Table 2

######

Basic parameters.

                     Group      n        Mean     Std. Deviation   Std. Error Mean   *p*-Value
  ------------------ ---------- -------- -------- ---------------- ----------------- -----------
  Age                Controls   27       47.70    13.088           2.519             0.085
  Patients           27         41.30    13.708   2.638
  BMI                Controls   27       26.163   5.6835           1.0938            0.186
  Patients           27         24.259   4.7021   0.9049
  25OHD\* (nmol/L)   Controls   27       53.67    22.940           4.415             0.060
  Patients           27         41.26    24.513   4.718

\*: 25-OH-cholecalciferol.

ijerph-16-04607-t003_Table 3

######

VDD in both groups.

                     Group    Total
  ------------------ -------- -------- -------- ---- ----
  25OHD ^a^ nmol/L   ≤25      Count    1        14   15
  \% within group    3.7%     51.9%    27.8%
  \>25               Count    26       13       39
  \% within group    96.3%    48.1%    72.2%
  Total              Count    27       27       54
  \% within group    100.0%   100.0%   100.0%
  25OHD ^b^ nmol/L   ≤50      Count    13       21   34
  \% within group    48.1%    77.8%    63.0%
  \>50               Count    14       6        20
  \% within group    51.9%    22.2%    37.0%
  Total              Count    27       27       54
  \% within group    100.0%   100.0%   100.0%

^a^ *p* \< 0.001; ^b^ *p* = 0.024; 25OHD: 25-OH-cholecalciferol; VDD: vitamin D deficiency.

ijerph-16-04607-t004_Table 4

######

Geographical regions of origin for LMIC(low- and middle-income countries) subjects.

                       Frequency   Percent   Valid Percent   Cumulative Percent
  -------------------- ----------- --------- --------------- --------------------
  South America        3           5.6       5.6             5.6
  Eastern Africa       3           5.6       5.6             11.1
  Northern Africa      6           11.1      11.1            22.2
  Caribbean            1           1.9       1.9             24.1
  Eastern Asia         5           9.3       9.3             33.3
  Southern Asia        9           16.7      16.7            50.0
  South-eastern Asia   2           3.7       3.7             53.7
  Southern Europe      11          20.4      20.4            74.1
  Western Asia         6           11.1      11.1            85.2
  Eastern Europe       7           13.0      13.0            98.1
  Northern Europe      1           1.9       1.9             100.0
  Total                54          100.0     100.0

ijerph-16-04607-t005_Table 5

######

Types of admission and discharge for LMIC subjects.

                           Frequency   Percent   Valid Percent   Cumulative Percent
  ------------------------ ----------- --------- --------------- -------------------- ------
  **Admission**            Police      1         1.9             1.9                  1.9
  Self-admission           38          70.4      70.4            72.2
  Ambulance                5           9.3       9.3             81.5
  Private (GP)             3           5.6       5.6             87.0
  Primary utilization      3           5.6       5.6             92.6
  Other or not specified   4           7.4       7.4             100.0
  Total                    54          100.0     100.0
  Discharge                At home     42        77.8            77.8                 77.8
  Inpatient                9           16.7      16.7            94.4
  Other or not specified   3           5.6       5.6             100.0
  Total                    54          100.0     100.0

GP: general practitioner; LMIC: low- and middle-income countries.

ijerph-16-04607-t006_Table 6

######

Sub-group analysis for women.

                   Group      n        Mean     Std. Deviation   Std. Error Mean   *p*-Value
  ---------------- ---------- -------- -------- ---------------- ----------------- -----------
  Age              Controls   13       43.31    13.073           3.626             0.179
  Patients         17         36.65    13.124   3.183
  BMI              Controls   13       26.908   5.8273           1.6162            0.194
  Patients         17         24.329   4.7864   1.1609
  25OHD (nmol/L)   Controls   13       53.31    25.316           7.021             0.037
  Patients         17         36.59    16.382   3.973

25OHD: 25-OH-cholecalciferol.

[^1]: Share joint the last position.


Q:

Notepad++ Remove everything before the : string?

I have a file like so...

user@hotmail.com:password

I would like to remove the hotmail address and just keep the password with no :
So the file will look like the following in a nice list..

passwords
  passwords

A:

Use the find and replace option (CTRL + H):
Use the Regular Expression mode and replace .*: with an empty string.
This will result in a list of passwords which are line seperated.
Then, if you want to remove the new-lines switch to Extended *\n, \r ...) mode and replace \n with a space. (You might need \r\n depending on how you saved your file)


<?php
declare(strict_types=1);

namespace RZ\Roadiz\Console;

use RZ\Roadiz\Core\Entities\Translation;
use Symfony\Component\Console\Command\Command;
use Symfony\Component\Console\Input\InputArgument;
use Symfony\Component\Console\Input\InputInterface;
use Symfony\Component\Console\Output\OutputInterface;
use Symfony\Component\Console\Question\ConfirmationQuestion;
use Symfony\Component\Console\Style\SymfonyStyle;

/**
 * Command line utils for managing translations.
 */
class TranslationsEnableCommand extends Command
{
    private $entityManager;

    protected function configure()
    {
        $this->setName('translations:enable')
            ->setDescription('Enables a translation')
            ->addArgument(
                'locale',
                InputArgument::REQUIRED,
                'Translation locale'
            );
    }

    protected function execute(InputInterface $input, OutputInterface $output)
    {
        $io = new SymfonyStyle($input, $output);
        $this->entityManager = $this->getHelper('entityManager')->getEntityManager();
        $locale = $input->getArgument('locale');

        $translation = $this->entityManager
            ->getRepository(Translation::class)
            ->findOneByLocale($locale);

        if ($translation !== null) {
            $confirmation = new ConfirmationQuestion(
                '<question>Are you sure to enable ' . $translation->getName() . ' (' . $translation->getLocale() . ') translation?</question>',
                false
            );
            if ($io->askQuestion(
                $confirmation
            )) {
                $translation->setAvailable(true);
                $this->entityManager->flush();
                $io->success('Translation enabled.');
            }
        } else {
            $io->error('Translation for locale ' . $locale . ' does not exist.');
            return 1;
        }
        return 0;
    }
}


What is 76.16 rounded to the nearest ten?
80
Round -0.000002885 to 7 dps.
-0.0000029
Round 5944.5 to the nearest 1000.
6000
What is -0.0001486 rounded to 6 dps?
-0.000149
What is 0.008086 rounded to three decimal places?
0.008
What is -0.00011021 rounded to six decimal places?
-0.00011
What is 0.01151 rounded to three decimal places?
0.012
Round -0.2574 to 2 dps.
-0.26
Round -13.0725 to one dp.
-13.1
Round -585510 to the nearest one hundred thousand.
-600000
What is -3944000 rounded to the nearest 100000?
-3900000
What is -1432400 rounded to the nearest 100000?
-1400000
Round -11.444 to 1 decimal place.
-11.4
Round 0.382 to the nearest integer.
0
What is 1.2078 rounded to 1 dp?
1.2
What is 13754000 rounded to the nearest one million?
14000000
What is -0.00037461 rounded to 5 dps?
-0.00037
Round -0.003499 to 4 decimal places.
-0.0035
Round 3.68375 to 1 decimal place.
3.7
What is 1134 rounded to the nearest one hundred?
1100
Round 9024.7 to the nearest one hundred.
9000
What is 2041 rounded to the nearest 1000?
2000
Round -67210 to the nearest one thousand.
-67000
Round 0.00034396 to 5 dps.
0.00034
Round -141838 to the nearest ten thousand.
-140000
Round 0.0064107 to three decimal places.
0.006
What is 0.00022692 rounded to five dps?
0.00023
Round -161360 to the nearest 10000.
-160000
Round 327100 to the nearest 1000.
327000
What is -0.00000303 rounded to six decimal places?
-0.000003
What is -139.958 rounded to the nearest 10?
-140
Round 19412300 to the nearest one hundred thousand.
19400000
Round 0.55818 to 1 decimal place.
0.6
What is -0.00036903 rounded to 4 decimal places?
-0.0004
Round 0.00017333 to 6 dps.
0.000173
What is -6.69 rounded to zero dps?
-7
What is -32253 rounded to the nearest 1000?
-32000
Round 7.3063 to 1 dp.
7.3
What is 370200 rounded to the nearest one hundred thousand?
400000
What is 4750.1 rounded to the nearest one hundred?
4800
Round 3370 to the nearest one thousand.
3000
What is -3591000 rounded to the nearest 1000000?
-4000000
Round 19.83 to zero dps.
20
Round 0.003049 to four dps.
0.003
Round -37720 to the nearest 10000.
-40000
Round -14883 to the nearest 100.
-14900
What is 0.22257 rounded to three decimal places?
0.223
What is -0.27433 rounded to two dps?
-0.27
Round -240 to the nearest 1000.
0
What is -0.00000062618 rounded to seven dps?
-0.0000006
Round -16.32 to the nearest integer.
-16
What is -0.00013209 rounded to five dps?
-0.00013
What is 82589 rounded to the nearest 100?
82600
What is -0.00029221 rounded to 5 decimal places?
-0.00029
What is -0.056235 rounded to three dps?
-0.056
Round 0.000011441 to six decimal places.
0.000011
Round 640800 to the nearest 10000.
640000
What is 2559 rounded to the nearest 100?
2600
Round -0.4678 to two decimal places.
-0.47
Round -756350 to the nearest 1000.
-756000
What is -1121 rounded to the nearest 10?
-1120
Round 2128800 to the nearest 100000.
2100000
Round -5455000 to the nearest 100000.
-5500000
Round -88.99 to 0 dps.
-89
What is -0.070614 rounded to 2 decimal places?
-0.07
What is -1.368 rounded to 1 decimal place?
-1.4
Round -1.15418 to 1 dp.
-1.2
Round 0.0000003517 to seven decimal places.
0.0000004
What is 0.0000057208 rounded to six decimal places?
0.000006
Round -0.00179267 to 4 dps.
-0.0018
What is 0.21328 rounded to three dps?
0.213
What is -1285120 rounded to the nearest 100000?
-1300000
Round 0.000001128 to 7 dps.
0.0000011
What is -0.021395 rounded to 3 decimal places?
-0.021
Round 1415.6 to the nearest 10.
1420
Round 0.00001677 to 6 dps.
0.000017
What is 0.0408 rounded to 2 dps?
0.04
What is -0.0005242 rounded to 4 decimal places?
-0.0005
Round 0.00015443 to five decimal places.
0.00015
Round -13844.4 to the nearest one thousand.
-14000
Round -0.0003458 to six decimal places.
-0.000346
Round -0.0005788 to five dps.
-0.00058
What is 76640 rounded to the nearest 10000?
80000
Round -5265.3 to the nearest 1000.
-5000
Round 0.6927 to 1 decimal place.
0.7
What is 0.01646 rounded to 3 dps?
0.016
Round -5.903 to the nearest integer.
-6
Round -33.655 to one dp.
-33.7
Round 0.03163 to three dps.
0.032
What is 0.001913 rounded to 4 dps?
0.0019
Round -0.05 to two dps.
-0.05
What is -12300000 rounded to the nearest one million?
-12000000
Round 4.6281 to the nearest integer.
5
What is -0.00711 rounded to 3 decimal places?
-0.007
What is -68.353 rounded to the nearest integer?
-68
What is -6020 rounded to the nearest 1000?
-6000
What is -0.34235 rounded to three decimal places?
-0.342
What is 0.05095 rounded to three decimal places?
0.051
Round 99000 to the nearest 100000.
100000
Round 510000 to the nearest one hundred thousand.
500000
Round -39140 to the nearest 10000.
-40000
What is 1111700 rounded to the nearest ten thousand?
1110000
What is -0.5966 rounded to 2 decimal places?
-0.6
What is -0.007366 rounded to three decimal places?
-0.007
What is 1522000 rounded to the nearest 100000?
1500000
Round -0.133109 to two decimal places.
-0.13
Round 0.00689 to 4 decimal places.
0.0069
What is -6.44 rounded to zero decimal places?
-6
What is -2943 rounded to the nearest one hundred?
-2900
Round -1700200 to the nearest 10000.
-1700000
What is -44200000 rounded to the nearest one million?
-44000000
What is -794 rounded to the nearest one thousand?
-1000
What is 3332700 rounded to the nearest 1000000?
3000000
What is 937000 rounded to the nearest 100000?
900000
Round 0.01501 to 3 dps.
0.015
What is 0.000001503 rounded to 7 dps?
0.0000015
What is 0.207 rounded to 2 decimal places?
0.21
What is 0.000606 rounded to 4 dps?
0.0006
Round 332500 to the nearest 1000.
333000
What is 0.091418 rounded to two dps?
0.09
Round 0.03951 to three dps.
0.04
What is 1.55809 rounded to 2 decimal places?
1.56
What is 34076 rounded to the nearest one thousand?
34000
What is -4.276 rounded to the nearest integer?
-4
Round -0.000076119 to 6 dps.
-0.000076
Round 292680 to the nearest 1000.
293000
What is -0.34754 rounded to one decimal place?
-0.3
What is 1031 rounded to the nearest 10?
1030
Round 1381.3 to the nearest one hundred.
1400
Round -48.8 to the nearest 100.
0
Round -0.0063641 to 3 dps.
-0.006
Round -17300 to the nearest one thousand.
-17000
What is 0.0064316 rounded to three decimal places?
0.006
What is 136796 rounded to the nearest one hundred?
136800
Round -5994000 to the nearest 1000000.
-6000000
Round -0.00124 to three dps.
-0.001
What is -91000 rounded to the nearest ten thousand?
-90000
What is 0.000010523 rounded to six decimal places?
0.000011
Round -85567 to the nearest 100.
-85600
Round -0.027191 to four dps.
-0.0272
What is 1040.3 rounded to the nearest ten?
1040
What is 0.29032 rounded to two dps?
0.29
Round 0.004354 to 4 decimal places.
0.0044
What is 0.000139412 rounded to six dps?
0.000139
What is -185313 rounded to the nearest 1000?
-185000
Round -0.009669 to 2 dps.
-0.01
Round 603.73 to the nearest 10.
600
What is -57940000 rounded to the nearest 1000000?
-58000000
Round 0.2458 to 2 decimal places.
0.25
Round -575.39 to zero dps.
-575
What is -2574000 rounded to the nearest 100000?
-2600000
What is 56.8595 rounded to 0 dps?
57
Round -2813.8 to the nearest 100.
-2800
What is 0.000983 rounded to 4 dps?
0.001
Round 0.0060186 to three decimal places.
0.006
Round -1.2506 to 1 dp.
-1.3
Round 237330 to the nearest 100000.
200000
Round 2800 to the nearest 10000.
0
Round 5351 to the nearest 100.
5400
What is 2812 rounded to the nearest one hundred?
2800
What is 33.211 rounded to the nearest integer?
33
What is 104590 rounded to the nearest 10000?
100000
Round 218.6 to the nearest 100.
200
What is 772920000 rounded to the nearest 1000000?
773000000
Round 0.0016618 to 5 decimal places.
0.00166
What is -0.00002925 rounded to five dps?
-0.00003
Round 0.0003588 to four dps.
0.0004
Round -0.03372 to three dps.
-0.034
What is 0.0001303 rounded to 5 decimal places?
0.00013
Round -0.032951 to four dps.
-0.033
Round 19.14 to zero dps.
19
What is -168.699 rounded to the nearest ten?
-170
What is 11769 rounded to the nearest 1000?
12000
Round 0.0001319 to 6 decimal places.
0.000132
Round 8647 to the nearest 100.
8600
Round 469.92 to the nearest one hundred.
500
Round -31.581 to one decimal place.
-31.6
What is -7.293 rounded to the nearest integer?
-7
Round -0.0000335 to 5 decimal plac


Top 10: Beach Cities

The World's Best Beach Cities

Body Of Water The City Borders: Arabian SeaPopulation: Around 13,662,885Average Temperature In The Winter: 75°FAverage Temperature In The Summer: 85°F

Mumbai is the financial, commercial, industrial and celluloid capital of India, and it’s where Bollywood dreams are made. Built from the ground up on its colonial foundations, Mumbai is one part glitz, with flashy skyscrapers and designer stores, and one part poverty, with slums and seedy neighborhoods. Located next to the Arabian Sea, another one of Mumbai’s points of interest is, of course, the beach. Juhu Beach, which sits just outside of the city center, is lined with Mumbai’s best hotels, restaurants and nightclubs, and it's where the business bunch like to come and play. Mumbai’s deep-water port is also an essential component to the beachside city; it manages over half of India’s maritime cargo.

Best Beach

Fringed by Marina Drive on the western side of the city, Chowpatty Beach is Mumbai’s most charismatic beach. There are donkey rides, stalls selling bhelpuri (a savory snack favored in the region) and a huge man-powered Ferris wheel to be ridden. When the sun sets behind the Arabian Sea, Chowpatty Beach turns into a carnivalesque scene with astrology readings, plays, monkey shows and yoga demonstrations happening right on the sand. The beach also doubles as the venue for the annual Ganesh Chaturthi festival, during which giant statues of the elephant god are thrown into the sea. This is beach-going India-style, and there are no apparent rules or regulations.


630 So.2d 923 (1993)
FRANCOIS CHIROPRACTIC CENTER, A Professional Corporation, and Serge P. Francois, D.C.,
v.
Fritz G. FIDELE, D.C.
No. 93-CA-1417.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
December 30, 1993.
Wayne J. Lee, Alex J. Peragine, Stone, Pigman, Walther, Wittman & Hutchinson, New Orleans, and Jerry A. Beatmann, Metairie, for plaintiffs, appellants.
Roy J. Rodney, Jr., Kim M. Boyle, McGlinchey Stafford Lang, New Orleans, for defendant, appellant.
*924 Before BYRNES, and JONES, JJ., and JOHN A. DIXON, J. Pro Tem.
JONES, Judge.
Francois Chiropractic Center and Dr. Francois appeal the trial court's judgment partially modifying and dissolving a preliminary injunction.
Since 1984, Francois Chiropractic Center, "the Center", has owned and operated a full service chiropractic clinic on Broad Street in New Orleans. Dr. Francois, the sole shareholder of the Center, began negotiations with Dr. Fidele in the spring of 1991 for the sale of the Center. Sometime before July 6, 1992, Dr. Fidele relinquished his rights under the purchase contract and worked as an independent contractor for the Center. On July 6, 1992, the parties entered a new agreement, the contract at issue.
The July 6, 1992 agreement is a twelve-month contract which creates an employer/independent contractor relationship between the parties at a monthly compensation rate which is not clear from the contract. The pertinent provisions of the contract are as follows:
5. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. Contractor shall not, for a period of one year beginning with the date of termination, enter into the same or any other similar practice either directly or indirectly, as owner, partner, employee, or shareholder, officer or director of any corporation or organization within a ten (10) mile radius of the outer city limits of New Orleans, Louisiana.
....
16. JURISDICTION, VENUE. Jurisdiction for any question, dispute or matter with respect to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the rights of the parties, or any other matter affecting the interests of the party or arising under this Agreement, shall be in the State of Texas. Dallas, Texas is deemed convenient by both parties.
From July 1992 to March 31, 1993 Dr. Fidele directed the Center and controlled its daily operations. At that time, Dr. Fidele resigned from his position at the Center and he immediately opened his own chiropractic clinic at 3901 St. Claude Avenue in New Orleans.
Suit was filed on April 20, 1993 seeking injunctive relief and damages pursuant to the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act, La. R.S. 5:1401 et seq. and the parties' written agreement. The trial court issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting Dr. Fidele from operating any chiropractic clinic within the territorial limits covered by the July 6, 1992 agreement. The injunction also prohibited Dr. Fidele from treating former patients of the Center and from using any patient lists or other patient information obtained from the Center.
On May 7, 1993, after this matter was permanently assigned in Civil District Court, Dr. Fidele filed a motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction and for damages and attorney's fees. On May 10th, the trial court entered an order denying Dr. Fidele's rule to show cause for an expedited hearing on his motion stating that Dr. Fidele's remedy was an appeal of the May 4, 1993 order. However, the trial court scheduled a status conference for May 13th and considered Dr. Fidele's motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction. Subsequently, the trial court dissolved that part of the May 4th injunction prohibiting Dr. Fidele from operating his clinic. The restraint from soliciting former and current patients of the Center and utilizing its patient lists remained in effect.
By their first assignment of error, appellants argue that the agreement not to compete is enforceable under Texas law. We disagree and find that the agreement is unenforceable as overbroad.
Appellants rely on Property Tax Associates v. Staffeldt, 800 S.W.2d 349, 352 (TX App.1990) to show that a two year non-competition covenant was reasonable and not greater than necessary to protect the goodwill or other business interest of the former employer. Appellants further submit that non-competition covenants require independent consideration only when the covenant is executed on a date other than the date of the underlying agreement. Webb v. Hartman Newspapers, Inc., 793 S.W.2d 302, 304 (TX *925 App.1990). In Webb, the Court concluded that the geographic scope of the non-competition covenant was overbroad and reformed it from a 50 mile radius to a 10 mile radius, otherwise upholding the agreement.
Appellants argue that the non-competition provisions of the July 1992 agreements meet the requirements of Texas law in that 1) the provisions are ancillary to a simultaneously executed and otherwise valid agreement made with adequate consideration to support the covenant; TEX.BUS. & COM.CODE ANN. Section 15.50(1) and 2) they argue that the restrictions are no greater than necessary to protect the Center's interest.
Dr. Fidele relies on Recon Exploration, Inc. v. Hodges, 798 S.W.2d 848, 853 (TX App.1990) in arguing that where the July 6, 1992 agreement was not executed until more than one year after the initial relationship between the parties, appellants can not prove that the non-competition agreement was ancillary to an otherwise enforceable agreement and there is no evidence of independent consideration. This argument lacks merit. Dr. Fidele relinquished his rights under the purchase agreement before executing the July 6th agreement. The covenant not to compete was part of the July 6th agreement and was therefore executed simultaneously.
Furthermore, Dr. Fidele responds that where the non-competition agreement is unreasonable, it is clearly invalid under Texas law. Zep Manufacturing Co. v. Harthcock, 824 S.W.2d 654, 660 (TX App.1992). Dr. Fidele submits where personal services are involved, the promise not to compete must additionally prove that the covenant contains certain reasonable limitations and does not impose restraints greater than necessary to protect their legitimate business interests. Daytona Group of Texas, Inc. v. Smith, 800 S.W.2d 285, 288 (TX App.1990).
Finally, Dr. Fidele argues that appellants have not established that the scope of activity to be restrained is necessary to protect their goodwill or business interest required under TEX.BUS. & COM.CODE ANN. Section 15.50(2). Texas law directs a court to focus on the need to protect a legitimate interest of the promisee and the hardship of such protection on the promisor and the public. Butts Retail, Inc. v. Diversifoods, Inc., 840 S.W.2d 770, 773 (TX App.1992). He argues the non-competition agreement is oppressive to both himself and the community. Additionally, appellants' legitimate business interest are adequately protected by the May 17th order modifying the May 4th preliminary injunction.
Dr. Fidele cites Phillip H. Hunke D.D.S. v. Wilcox, 815 S.W.2d 855 (TX App.1991) as precedent. In denying a petition for injunctive relief, the Hunke court reasoned:
Sources or professional referrals of this type do not form a legitimate proprietary interest which may be protected by a covenant not to compete. Allowing the cultivating of these professional relationships to be thus protected would be an unreasonable restraint of trade, encouraging small exclusive groups of a profession to systematically exclude outsiders from practicing in a given location.

Former employees are entitled to freely use general knowledge, skills and experience acquired during his employment to compete with his former employer. In the present case, we hold that the formation of professional contacts is in the realm of general experience that Wilcox may freely use and over which Hunke can assert no proprietary interest.
Supra at 858. (citations omitted) (emphasis added).
We agree that the July 6th agreement is overbroad and for that reason it is unenforceable under Texas law as it is written.
By their second assignment of error, appellants argue that the agreement not to compete does not contravene Louisiana public policy. Historically, Louisiana has disfavored such agreements. In a recent Fifth Circuit opinion, Team Environmental Services, Inc. v. Addison, 2 F.3d 124 (5th Cir.1993), Louisiana's public policy on covenants not to compete was discussed at length.
Louisiana's longstanding policy against covenants not to compete was codified in 1934. In 1962 the legislature exempted from its blanket bar those situations in which the employer had invested substantial *926 amounts in the training or the advertising of the particular employee. In 1989 the legislature redrafted the statute to broaden the exceptions. The amended statute, however, retains the general proscription; the first subsection proclaims that every agreement not to compete shall be null and void, except for those explicitly sheltered. We do not perceive this as a reversal in public policy, nor have those Louisiana intermediate appellate courts which have addressed the issue. "As the statute itself so plainly says, "the Second Circuit stated in Comet Industries, Inc. v. Lawrence [600 So.2d 85 (La.App.2d Cir. 1992) ], "these contracts are against public policy ..." The Fourth and Fifth Circuits expressly or implicitly have held the same. Therefore, "a contract seeking to fit into an exception to this rule must strictly comply with the requirements contained in the statute....
id at 126-27 (citations and footnotes omitted).
Appellants argue that the agreement between the parties provides that Texas law will govern. La.C.C. article 3540 allows the parties to choose what law will govern their agreements, except to the extent that that law contravenes the public policy of the State whose law would otherwise be applicable. We find that this agreement is both unenforceable under Texas law and contrary to Louisiana's public policy.
Comet Industries, Inc. v. Lawrence, 600 So.2d 85 (La.App. 2d Cir.1992), requires that any exceptions to Louisiana's policy against non-competition agreements strictly comply with statutory requirements.
[such non-competition] contracts are against public policy, LSA-R.S. 23:921A. They have historically been frowned upon in Louisiana. Indeed, the current law was only recently added by Louisiana Act 639 of 1989. We thus conclude that a contract seeking to fit into an exception to this rule must strictly comply with the requirements contained in the statute.
Supra at 87-88. (emphasis in original) (citations omitted).
La.R.S. 23:921 permits non-competition agreements only in parishes or municipalities where the employer "carries on a like business". Team Environmental Services, Inc. at 124. We find that the agreement does not strictly conform to the statute in that it does not clearly specify that the proscribed area is limited to the municipality of New Orleans. Additionally, the agreement is unenforceable under Texas law because it is broader than necessary to protect appellant's legitimate business interests.
For the foregoing reasons, the trial court's judgment is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.


32 So.3d 731 (2010)
Gabriel Alberto VALENTIN-RODRIGUEZ, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 5D08-749.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
April 16, 2010.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Susan A. Fagan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Douglas T. Squire, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
SAWAYA, J.
Gabriel Alberto Valentin-Rodriguez appeals his judgment and sentence after a jury found him guilty of four counts of sexual battery and two counts of false imprisonment. The trial court gave him two concurrent life sentences on two counts of sexual battery, with a mandatory minimum sentence of twenty-five years as a dangerous sexual felony offender and fifteen years concurrent in prison on one count of false imprisonment. Defendant argues: 1) the court erred by allowing use of the word "victim" to describe the victim of the crimes; 2) the court erred in permitting testimony that Defendant threatened suicide; 3) the court gave faulty jury instructions and verdict forms; and 4) two adjudications for false imprisonment violate double jeopardy.
We affirm as to all issues except the last. As to that issue, the State concedes error. Our review of the record confirms that the concession is proper. Accordingly, we reverse Defendant's conviction for count one, which charges one of the false imprisonment offenses. We remand this case to the trial court to prepare an amended judgment striking Defendant's conviction for that count. Resentencing will not be necessary because it appears that the trial court did not sentence Defendant on that count in anticipation of reversal based on double jeopardy grounds.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.
ORFINGER and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.