Evaluation of knowledge, experiences, and fear toward prescribing and dispensing corticosteroids among Egyptian healthcare professionals: A cross-sectional study.

Background: Corticosteroids (CS) are essential drugs in the treatment of several medical conditions. Assuming different roles, physicians and pharmacists play a primary role in prescribing and dispensing these medications to optimize patients' clinical management. The data on assessing knowledge and experience of healthcare professionals toward CS is scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to assess and compare knowledge, experience, and fears towards CS among Egyptian physicians and pharmacists. Methods: A cross-sectional, self-administrated, validated online questionnaire was used to collect the data from Egyptian healthcare professionals. The questionnaire consisted of four sections with multiple choice questions: sociodemographic (7 questions), knowledge about CS (13 questions), experience with CS prescription/dispensing (5 questions), and fears and preferences toward CS prescription/dispensing (13 questions). Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. Results: A total of 600 responses were analyzed in this study. The study sample was almost two-half of healthcare providers: 303 (50.5%) pharmacists and 297 (49.5%) physicians. Pharmacists had marginally higher knowledge scores as compared to those recorded for physicians (11.29 versus 10.16, respectively; P = 0.047). Physicians had more experience choosing corticosteroids in treatment plans based on their experience (51.8% vs 38.5%) and guideline recommendations (72.8% vs 50.9%) than pharmacists. However, pharmacists had more experience dealing with corticosteroid use based on patients' preferences (19.5% vs 4.9%) and showed a broader scope of experiencing side effects of corticosteroids with their patients. The two professions demonstrated high levels of fear, with pharmacists acknowledging significantly lower concerns about CS than physicians (3.72 versus 4.0, respectively; P = 0.003). Conclusion: Discrepancies exist among healthcare professionals in knowledge and experience, favoring better scientific knowledge of pharmacists related to corticosteroids. Based on these findings, the interprofessional collaborative efforts would provide comprehensive, patient-centered care that maximizes the benefits of CS while minimizing their risks.

Comparative efficacy of lidocaine-prilocaine cream and vaginal misoprostol in reducing pain during levonorgestrel intrauterine device insertion in women delivered only by cesarean delivery: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy of lidocaine-prilocaine (LP) cream versus misoprostol versus placebo before levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) insertion. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital from April 30, 2020 to March 1, 2021 on 210 parous women willing to receive LNG-IUD and delivered only by elective cesarean delivery (CD). Participants received 200 µg vaginal misoprostol or 5 ml of LP cream 5% or placebo 3 h before LNG-IUS insertion. Primary outcome was pain during LNG-IUD insertion, while secondary outcomes were pain 10 min post-procedure, ease of insertion, patient satisfaction, insertion time, and drug side effects. RESULTS: Pain during LNG-IUS insertion was reduced in LP group and misoprostol group compared to placebo group (2.1 ± 1.0 vs 3.7 ± 1.6; p <0.001) and (2.3 ± 1.3 vs 3.7 ± 1.6; p <0.001), respectively. Ease of procedure and patient satisfaction were significantly higher in LP and misoprostol groups than placebo (P <0.001). Need for additional analgesia was significantly higher in placebo group than in the other two groups (P = 0.009). Adverse events were not significantly different between the three groups except vomiting and abdominal cramps, which were higher with misoprostol. CONCLUSION: LP cream and 200 µg of vaginal misoprostol administration before LNG-IUD insertion in women delivered only by elective CD effectively reduced pain during insertion and 10 min post-procedure with easier insertions, high patient satisfaction, and tolerable side effects. Pain reduction with LP cream was clinically significant.

The effectiveness of the abdominal binder in relieving pain after cesarean delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal binder is a non-pharmacological method of relieving pain after surgical procedures. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the abdominal binder in relieving pain and distress scores after cesarean delivery (CD). SEARCH STRATEGY: The following terms were searched: cesarean section, cesarean, caesarean, abdominal deliveries, C-section, abdominal delivery, abdominal binding, binder, and abdominal binder. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with patients undergoing CD receiving an abdominal binder compared with non-users of the abdominal binder. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Five electronic databases were searched until November 2019. Records were screened for eligibility. Data were extracted independently and analyzed. The main outcomes were pain and distress scores. RESULTS: The final analysis included six RCTs. Overall effect estimate favored the abdominal binder group over the control group in the following outcomes: VAS pain scores after 24 h (mean difference [MD] -1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.14 to -0.39; P = 0.01), VAS scores after 48 h (MD -1.21; 95% CI -1.51 to -0.90; P < 0.001), distress score after 24 h (MD -1.87; 95% CI -3.01 to -0.73; P = 0.001), and distress score after 48 h (MD -1.87; 95% CI -3.07 to -0.67; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The abdominal binder could be an effective, simple, non-pharmacological option of relieving pain and distress after CD.

The safety and effectiveness of Bakri balloon in the management of postpartum hemorrhage: a systematic review.

Background: Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is a direct cause of maternal death all over the world. A Bakri balloon is recommended by American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and World Health Organization (WHO) as a treatment line for PPH unresponsive to uterotonics. We carried out a systematic review to assess the safety and effectiveness of Bakri balloon in the management of PPH.Methods: We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, central Cochrane, and Web of Science, from 2001 to 2018 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies to assess the safety and effectiveness of Bakri balloon on refractory PPH.Results: Twenty-eight articles were included for analysis. The primary indication for the use of a Bakri balloon tamponade was PPH. Only 67.9% (19/28) quantified the estimate blood loss necessary to use the balloon. Uterine atony was the underlying cause of PPH in 75% (21/28) of studies. Most of the studies on Bakri balloon are followed by vaginal birth (3/4). Bakri balloon displacement from the uterine cavity was reported by five publications, with the overall rate being 9% (95% CI: 5-15%). Hysterectomy was necessary for 1% (95% CI: 0-8%) of the women who required the balloon.Conclusions: Bakri balloon seems to be a less effective tool for management of PPH either after vaginal or cesarean delivery.