Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Saudi Med J ; 45(7): 710-718, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38955439

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To understand the prevalence and survival rates of preterm birth (PTB) is of utmost importance in informing healthcare planning, improving neonatal care, enhancing maternal and infant health, monitoring long-term outcomes, and guiding policy and advocacy efforts. METHODS: The medical records of preterm infants admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) with a diagnosis of prematurity at the Maternity and Children's Hospital (MCH), Al Kharj, Saudi Arabia, were reviewed between January 2018 and December 2022. Data were collected on birth weight (BW), gender, number of live births, gestational age, mortality, nationality, APGAR score, length of stay in the NICU, and maternal details. RESULTS: A total of 9809 live births were identified between 2018 and 2022, of which 139 (3.9%) were born preterm. The overall mortality rate of the included sample was 7.19%, whereas the mortality rate according to BW was 38.4% of those born with extremely low birth weight (ELBW). The most common intrapartum complications were malpresentation (15.1%), placental complications (4.3%), and cord complications (3.6%). CONCLUSION: This study provides valuable insights into the prevalence of PTB in the country, particularly focusing on the vulnerability of extremely preterm babies.


Subject(s)
Premature Birth , Humans , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , Female , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Infant, Newborn , Cross-Sectional Studies , Male , Incidence , Pregnancy , Gestational Age , Infant, Premature , Infant Mortality/trends , Survival Rate , Birth Weight , Infant , Intensive Care Units, Neonatal/statistics & numerical data , Infant, Extremely Low Birth Weight , Apgar Score
2.
Br J Clin Pharmacol ; 88(4): 1567-1589, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34679196

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Growing evidence suggests an association between the use of sedative-hypnotic medications and risk of dementia. The aim of this study is to examine this association using a meta-analysis approach. METHODS: MEDLINE (PubMed) and Scopus were systematically searched for studies published in English only. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and an overall odds ratio was pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 35 articles were included in the analysis. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) for dementia from all records were (OR; 1.33, 95% CI 1.19-1.49) for benzodiazepine (BZD) combined use (Subgroup-1), (OR: 1.46, 95% CI 1.23-1.73) for short-acting BZD use (Subgroup-2), (OR: 1.72, 95% CI 1.48-1.99) for long-acting BZD use (Subgroup-3), (OR: 1.13, 95% CI 0.97-1.32) for BZDs without specification of duration of action (Subgroup-4), (OR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.13-2.38) for the combined BZDs and Z-drugs, (OR: 1.43, 95% CI 1.17-1.74) for Z-drugs only, (OR: 1.14, 95% CI 0.88-1.46) for antidepressant use, (OR: 0.97, 95% CI 0.68-1.39) for antipsychotic use and (OR: 0.98, 95% CI 0.85-1.13) for anticonvulsant use. When sensitivity analysis was performed, association between overall use of BZDs and short-acting BZDs with the increased risk of dementia disappeared after exclusion of studies that were not adjusted for age covariate (OR: 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.44) and (OR: 1.22, 95% CI 0.75-2.01), respectively. Adjustment for protopathic bias by introduction of a lag period showed no evidence of increased risk of dementia with the use of BZDs (Subgroup-1) (OR: 1.14, 95% CI 0.82-1.58), Z-drugs (OR: 1.29, 95% CI 0.78-2.13), and combined BZDs and Z-drugs (OR: 1.51, 95% CI 0.91-2.53). Combined use of BZDs and Z-drugs showed more positive association when only studies of non-user design were analysed (OR: 2.75, 95% CI 2.23-3.39). CONCLUSIONS: All the investigated sedative-hypnotics showed no association with increased risk of dementia except for BZDs. However, the observed association with BZDs did not persist after exclusion of studies with potential reverse causation and confounding by indication. Therefore, this association needs to be assessed carefully in future research.


Subject(s)
Dementia , Hypnotics and Sedatives , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Benzodiazepines/adverse effects , Dementia/chemically induced , Dementia/drug therapy , Dementia/epidemiology , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives/adverse effects , Odds Ratio
3.
Healthcare (Basel) ; 9(9)2021 Sep 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34574976

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) severity assessment scores are widely used, their validity in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is not well defined. We aimed to investigate the validity and performance of the existing scores among adults in LMICs (Africa and South Asia). METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus and Web of Science were searched to 21 May 2020. Studies evaluating a pneumonia severity score/tool among adults in these countries were included. A bivariate random-effects meta-analysis was performed to examine the scores' performance in predicting mortality. RESULTS: Of 9900 records, 11 studies were eligible, covering 12 tools. Only CURB-65 (Confusion, Urea, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, Age ≥ 65 years) and CRB-65 (Confusion, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, Age ≥ 65 years) were included in the meta-analysis. Both scores were effective in predicting mortality risk. Performance characteristics (with 95% Confidence Interval (CI)) at high (CURB-65 ≥ 3, CRB-65 ≥ 3) and intermediate-risk (CURB-65 ≥ 2, CRB-65 ≥ 1) cut-offs were as follows: pooled sensitivity, for CURB-65, 0.70 (95% CI = 0.25-0.94) and 0.96 (95% CI = 0.49-1.00), and for CRB-65, 0.09 (95% CI = 0.01-0.48) and 0.93 (95% CI = 0.50-0.99); pooled specificity, for CURB-65, 0.90 (95% CI = 0.73-0.96) and 0.64 (95% CI = 0.45-0.79), and for CRB-65, 0.99 (95% CI = 0.95-1.00) and 0.43 (95% CI = 0.24-0.64). CONCLUSIONS: CURB-65 and CRB-65 appear to be valid for predicting mortality in LMICs. CRB-65 may be employed where urea levels are unavailable. There is a lack of robust evidence regarding other scores, including the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI).

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL