Adherence, Disease Control, and Misconceptions Related to the Use of Inhalation Therapy in Patients with Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background and Objectives: Inadequate treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) might have a negative impact on their progression. Inhalation therapy is the cornerstone of pharmacotherapy for these conditions. However, challenges such as low adherence, negative attitudes, and misconceptions about inhaled medications still persist, impeding effective disease management. This study aimed to evaluate adherence, ascertain the level of disease control in asthma and COPD, explore potential misconceptions surrounding inhalation therapy among patients with obstructive lung diseases and the general population in Vojvodina, and evaluate the reliability of newly developed questionnaires employed in the study. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study utilized a battery of questionnaires encompassing sociodemographic data, the Asthma Control Test (ACT), the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), along with two novel questionnaires-one for assessing adherence and another for analyzing attitudes toward inhalation therapy. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS software, version 25.0. Results: The average ACT score among patients with asthma was 17.31, while it was 19.09 for the CAT questionnaire among COPD patients. The composite score on the newly developed adherence assessment questionnaire was 2.27, exhibiting a reliability coefficient lower than recommended (α = 0.468). Significant statistical differences emerged among sample subgroups regarding attitudes and misconceptions toward inhalation therapy. The reliability coefficient for this questionnaire was deemed satisfactory (α = 0.767). Conclusions: Adherence rates were notably suboptimal in both subgroups of the studied population. The disease control levels were higher among asthma patients, while they exhibited less prevalent misconceptions regarding inhalation therapy compared to COPD patients and the healthy population.

Cross-cultural validation of the Lower Extremity Functional Scale in Serbian postmenopausal women with knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Translation and cross-cultural validation of the Serbian version of the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (Srb-LEFS). METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study initially included 186 postmenopausal women aged 60 to 75 years who underwent an x-ray examination of both knees, along with body mass, body height, waist circumference, knee range of motion, and blood pressure measurements. The laboratory analyses included the evaluation of fasting glucose levels and lipid profile. All participants completed the LEFS, Lequesne index, and 36-Item Short-Form Survey-RAND. RESULTS: The analyses revealed good internal consistency (α = 0.95), good test-retest reliability, and a two-factor structure of the Srb-LEFS. Concurrent validity analysis confirmed a significant positive correlation between Srb-LEFS scores and the 36-Item Short-Form Survey-RAND Physical Functioning subscale ( r = 0.889, P < 0.0001), the Lequesne index ( r = -0.976, P < 0.0001), and the Numeric Rating Scale for pain ( r = -0.762, P < 0.0001). Convergent validity analyses revealed a statistically significant negative correlation between the Srb-LEFS scores and age ( r = -0.25, P = 0.006), body mass index ( r = -0.31, P < 0.01), and waist circumference ( r = -0.37, P < 0.0001). The Srb-LEFS scores were statistically significantly higher among participants that reported moderate physical activity levels, as well as those that had fewer comorbidities, minor structural knee damage, greater knee range of motion, and greater quadriceps femoris muscle strength. CONCLUSIONS: The Serbian version of the LEFS is feasible, valid, and reliable for use in both clinical practice and clinical studies to assess self-reported physical functioning in older individuals with knee osteoarthritis.

Student stress and worry related to distance education during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused considerable stress and anxiety in the general population, especially among students. The objective of this study was to determine the stress and anxiety levels among medical rehabilitation students induced by distance education during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODOLOGY: The sample for this prospective cross-sectional study included 96 students pursuing the medical rehabilitation undergraduate degree at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Novi Sad, Serbia. All respondents took part in an online survey created on the Google Forms platform and accessed via the Facebook social network. The questionnaire included a sociodemographic section, the perceived stress scale (PSS), and the worry about online learning scale (WOLS). All data were analyzed using the IBM SPSS version 25. RESULTS: The study involved 96 students with an average age of 21.97 ± 1.55 years, 72.9% of whom were female. The total stress reported by the students during the COVID-19 pandemic was higher in females than in males (21.75 [SD = 7.50] vs. 17.84 [SD = 8.58]; p < 0.05). Younger students were more susceptible to experiencing stress during the pandemic (rho = -0.217, p < 0.05). Moreover, 57.3% of students suffered from moderate stress, while the WOLS scores indicated that distance education induced a high level of discomfort in this cohort (3.8 [IQR = 1.6]). CONCLUSIONS: Medical rehabilitation students showed a moderate level of stress and a high level of concern about distance education. This stress was more prevalent among younger students and females.