Superficial Venous Disease-An Updated Review.

BACKGROUND: This review article provides an updated review of a relatively common pathology with various manifestations. Superficial venous diseases (SVDs) are a broad spectrum of venous vascular disease that predominantly affects the body's lower extremities. The most serious manifestation of this disease includes varicose veins, chronic venous insufficiency, stasis dermatitis, venous ulcers, superficial venous thrombosis, reticular veins, and spider telangiectasias. METHODS: The anatomy, pathophysiology, and risk factors of SVD were discussed during this review. The risk factors for developing SVD were related to race, age, sex, lifestyle, and certain genetic conditions as well as comorbid deep vein thrombosis. Various classification systems were listed, focusing on the most common one-the revised Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology classification. The clinical features including history and physical examination findings elicited in SVD were outlined. RESULTS: Imaging modalities utilized in SVD were highlighted. Duplex ultrasound is the first line in evaluating SVD but magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography venography, plethysmography, and conventional venography are feasible options in the event of an ambiguous venous duplex ultrasound study. Treatment options highlighted in this review ranged from conservative treatment with compression stockings, which could be primary or adjunctive to pharmacologic topical and systemic agents such as azelaic acid, diuretics, plant extracts, medical foods, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, anticoagulants and skin substitutes for different stages of SVD. Interventional treatment modalities include thermal ablative techniques like radiofrequency ablationss, endovenous laser ablation, endovenous steam ablation, and endovenous microwave ablation as well as nonthermal strategies such as the Varithena (polidocanol microfoam) sclerotherapy, VenaSeal (cyanoacrylate) ablation, and Endovenous mechanochemical ablation. Surgical treatments are also available and include debridement, vein ligation, stripping, and skin grafting. CONCLUSIONS: SVDs are prevalent and have varied manifestations predominantly in the lower extremities. Several studies highlight the growing clinical and financial burden of these diseases. This review provides an update on the pathophysiology, classification, clinical features, and imaging findings as well as the conservative, pharmacological, and interventional treatment options indicated for different SVD pathologies. It aims to expedite the timely deployment of therapies geared toward reducing the significant morbidity associated with SVD especially varicose veins, venous ulcers, and venous insufficiency, to improve the quality of life of these patients and prevent complications.

Vaccine acceptance, determinants, and attitudes toward vaccine among people experiencing homelessness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has caused millions of deaths globally, with vulnerable populations such as people experiencing homelessness (PEH) at higher risk. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify the prevalence and key factors contributing to vaccine acceptance experienced by PEH. METHODS: The protocol of this study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023391659). We included studies that reported relevant information about vaccine acceptance or vaccine hesitant/refusal among PEH. Eight databases were systematically searched in January 2023. Meta-analysis was conducted for the prevalence of vaccine acceptance, vaccine uptake, and factors associated with vaccine acceptance. Attitudes toward vaccines were combined into bar charts. RESULT: A total of 29 papers were included in this systematic review and 19 papers were included for meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among PEH was 66% (95%CI: 58%-73%). Our meta-regression showed vaccine acceptance was significantly increased over time. Moreover, subgroup meta-analysis showed that PEH were more likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccine after June 2021 (78%, 95%CI: 65%-86%) compared with earlier period (56%, 95%CI: 54%-59%). Subgroup meta-analysis also revealed that women and participants without underlying medical condition (chronic diseases) were significantly less likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccine, compared to men and those with medical conditions, respectively. CONCLUSION: The study emphasizes the need for targeted public health interventions aimed at increasing vaccine acceptance among PEH, especially at the early stage of the pandemic, among females, those without underlying medical conditions, being Black (in Canada and the USA), and young people. These interventions should address the common concerns of vaccine safety, adverse effects, effectiveness, and distrust in health care systems. In addition to offering vaccinations in different areas convenient to them, education programs could be established to increase vaccine acceptance among PEH.

Trend and disparities in authorship of healthcare-related publications on the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war.

BACKGROUND: The Russia-Ukraine war has undeniably impacted global science and healthcare in Ukraine. Many Ukrainian researchers have had their projects disrupted by this war, either due to loss of life, displacement, or destruction of resources. Despite these challenges, these researchers have sought to make their voices heard. This scoping review highlights the trend of healthcare-related publications on the current Russia-Ukraine war and characterizes the contribution of Ukrainian authors to these publications. METHOD: A comprehensive literature search was performed using two databases (Scopus and Pubmed) for publications related to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. We included articles only related to healthcare. We then extracted and analyzed bibliometric data. RESULT: One hundred and eighty-three articles were identified, including 12 (6.6%) original articles, 26 (14.2%) cross-sectional studies, 19 (10.4%) letters to the editor, 10 (5.5%) commentaries, 5 (2.7%) perspectives, 35 (19.1%) editorials, 2 (1.1%) randomized controlled trials, 11(6.0%) correspondences, 13 (7.1%) opinions, 8 (4.4%) reviews and 42 (23.0%) are identified as others. 180 (98.4%) studies were in English, and 3 (1.7%) were in German. 54 (29.5%) papers on the war had at least one author affiliated with a Ukrainian institution, and 29 (15.9%) studies had authors with Ukrainian affiliation as first authors. CONCLUSION: our study shows that there has been a significant number of publications on the Russia-Ukraine war and only a small portion of first authors, co-authors, and last authors of these publications are affiliated to an institution in Ukraine. Therefore, despite the relatively high number of publications, most publications do not arise from the perspective of Ukrainian authors.