RESUMEN
Background Workplace violence in hospitals is an occupational hazard that affects healthcare workers (HCWs) negatively in many aspects and causes deterioration of the doctor-patient relationship, resulting in providence of substandard healthcare. This study was conducted to compare the pattern of violence in a tertiary care government teaching hospital and a multi-specialty private trust hospital in Sagar district, Madhya Pradesh, India. Methodology After ethical clearance of this cross-sectional, observational study, participants (frontline healthcare workers, including doctors and nurses) were asked about the type, frequency, department, and place of violence, etc., along with its perceived causes, solutions, and arrangements made by hospitals for dealing with it using a pretested, semi-structured questionnaire. Data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Categorical variables were described using frequency and percentages, and inferential analysis was conducted using the chi-square/Fisher's exact test. A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Among the 113 participants, 67 (59.3%) were female, 53 (46.9%) were doctors, and 60 (53.1%) were nurses. The mean age of participants was 30.9±7.3 years. Predominantly verbal, emotional, and physical violence were present in 96.5%, 43.4%, and 6.2% of participants, respectively. Violent incidents against healthcare workers were more frequent in government hospitals as compared to private hospitals. Most healthcare workers (87.6%) tried to resolve violent incidents peacefully, and 1.8% tried to fight back. The most perceived cause of violence in both setups was a lack of morality and literacy among patients and their relatives (i.e., 83.2%), followed by a lack of proper facilities and a lack of trust in healthcare workers. Conclusion Both setups faced a substantial amount of violence. The loopholes in both setups, considering resources, security, and other facilities, are clearly visible, and specific steps must be adopted to protect both systems from violence.
RESUMEN
Objective: Chronic orofacial pain (CP) is a persistent and debilitating condition that affects the face, mouth, and jaw and can have a significant impact on an individual's quality of life by posing problems to eat, speak, and perform everyday activities. By the means of this narrative review, we aim to assess different types of management modalities that exist to combat chronic orofacial pain. Design: Various databases were explored with MeSH keywords of chronic orofacial pain, orofacial pain, and interventions and treatment protocols for eligible articles. After an extensive literature search, it was ascertained that this review identified four major categories of treatment modalities for the management of chronic orofacial pain, namely pharmacological management, psychological management, lifestyle interventions-based management, and current stimulation-based management. Results: Of the four categories discussed, although pharmacological intervention offered the most immediate relief-especially from orofacial pain that was of a sudden, stab-like in nature-psychological management demonstrated a remarkable ability to reduce/alleviate the more serious aspect of chronic orofacial pain and was deemed better in comparison to the rest. Lifestyle-based techniques and current stimulation-based management were of limited use since they tended to focus more on the causal and not the symptomatic aspect of orofacial pain. Conclusions: Many patients with persistent orofacial discomfort can experience notable improvements in their symptoms and general well-being by all the treatment modalities evaluated.