Determining the Site of Upper Airway Narrowing in Snorers Using a Noninvasive Technique.

Background In this study, we aimed to determine the site of obstruction if surgical treatment is considered. Flexible nasopharyngoscopy is an invasive procedure currently used for the assessment of snoring and the level of obstruction. Here, we examine the role of Somnoscreen™ plus, a noninvasive cardiorespiratory polysomnographic device, in identifying the site of obstruction in patients presenting with snoring. Methodology This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Sleep Research Center at King Abdulaziz University Hospital. Polysomnography was conducted using Somnoscreen™ plus. All participants underwent flexible nasopharyngoscopy after polysomnography. Results Nasopharyngoscopy revealed that the most common site of obstruction was the nose and the soft palate (35.4%), followed by the soft palate alone (25%). Somnoscreen revealed that the site of obstruction was the nose and the soft palate in 18 (37.5%) patients and the nose alone in 16 (33.3%) patients. However, distal obstructions were not detected using Somnoscreen. The concordance of nasopharyngoscopy and Somnoscreen was 52.9%. However, it showed a discrepancy in identifying distal obstructions, which Somnoscreen™ plus failed to detect. Conclusions Somnoscreen appears to be sensitive for identifying proximal airway obstructions. The audio signal recordings can potentially be used as a tool to detect the site of airway obstruction in snoring; however, further studies are needed.

Too early for admission? A Telemedicine follow up comparison of mild COVID-19 patients from the Emergency Department and Clinics.

OBJECTIVE: Mildly symptomatic COVID-19 patients may seek medical attention either in the Emergency Department (ED) or Ambulatory Clinics (AC). However, it is unclear if ED patients have different characteristics and outcomes than AC patients when discharged under telemedicine surveillance, which we explored in this study. METHODS: Patients with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 disease referred to a multidisciplinary Telemedicine clinical service (TM-CS) program in an urban tertiary-care hospital, between June 2020 and February 2021, were evaluated. Those referred from ED were labeled "ED Group" and ones from AC as "AC Group." Their characteristics, clinical features and outcomes including telemedicine parameters, subsequent ED visits, hospital admission, oxygen requirements, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality were compared. RESULTS: Out of 1132 confirmed non-admitted COVID-19 patients, 526 with mild (89%) or asymptomatic (11%) disease were enrolled in TM-CS. Majority of these were referred from ED (n = 370; 70%) and rest (n = 156, 30%) from the AC. Patients in the ED group compared to AC group, had higher BMI (28.9 vs. 27.5), higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (1.4 vs. 0.9), and higher incidence of comorbidities (50% vs. 22%), P ≤ 0.01. However, there were no differences in the ED and AC groups in subsequent ED visits (26% vs. 24%), hospital admission (18% vs. 15%), oxygen requirements (5% vs. 4%), ICU admission (1% vs. 2%), and mortality (0.3% vs. 0.6%), respectively (P > 0.40). CONCLUSION: Significant number of mild COVID-19 patients head to the ED for initial assistance but have similar outcomes to AC patients. TM-CS could be a safe alternative for follow-up monitoring of these patients.

Medical Graduates' Research Practices and Perceptions: A comparative cross-sectional study between 2015 and 2017 graduates of King Abdulaziz University.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare changes in medical students' research practices and perceptions of two cohorts of graduates. METHODS: This cross-sectional comparative study was conducted from November 2014 to December 2017 and included the 2015 and 2017 medical graduates of King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. A validated self-administrated questionnaire, which included questions about participants' age and gender, research activities, and obstacles to and motivators for research involvement was used. RESULTS: A total of 484 graduates were included in this study (response rate: 96.8%). A significant difference was found between the 2015 and 2017 graduates who had not started any research project (48.4% versus 35%; P <0.001) and a 20% increase in the 2017 graduates' confidence in their abilities to start their own projects was observed (P <0.001). Significantly more 2017 graduates were engaged in various research roles, other than 'author', compared to 2015 graduates (71.3% versus 55.4%; P <0.001). Career progression was the main motivator for both the 2015 and 2017 medical graduates to participate in research (79.5%). Reported obstacles to research included a lack of dedicated time for research and methodology training and a shortage of research project opportunities. CONCLUSION: This study highlights positive changes in attitudes towards and perceptions of research among medical graduates.