An assessment of public experiences and expectations with physicians: a cross sectional study from Karachi, Pakistan.

BACKGROUND: Although physicians are highly regarded members of society, patients are not always satisfied with their care, suggesting a mismatch between the public's expectations and reality. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine the public's expectations regarding roles and responsibilities of a physician, to assess patient experiences, and to evaluate factors associated with the two outcomes. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted via face-to-face structured interviews from July 14th to August 2nd, 2023, in Karachi, Pakistan. The study sample comprised 424 consenting adults enrolled by visiting public spaces (malls, parks, hospitals, and residential areas). A modified version of 'Exceptionally Good Doctor Likert scale', and 'Patient Picker-15' (PPE-15) questionnaires was used. The Likert and PPE-15 sections were scored through pre-decided criteria for expectations and experience, respectively, and categorized using a median cut-off into high and low expectations and negative and positive experiences, respectively for simple and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A median score of 30.5/ 34 (IQR = 3.3) was found for expectations and 4/ 14 (IQR = 4) for experiences. Significant factors associated with expectations were older age groups (OR = 4.54 [1.18-17.50]) and higher monthly household incomes (0.40 [0.20-0.79]), while the odds of negative experiences were lower after visits to emergency departments (0.38 [0.18-0.84]) and private health care centers (0.31 [0.13-0.70]). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the public has high expectations from physicians, however their experiences are not always positive. Initiatives to develop a patient-centric ethos are needed for which we outline recommendations to both the public and physicians, respectively.

Perceived Usefulness of Smartphone Medical Apps As Theoretical and Clinical Learning Aids Among Medical Students in Pakistan: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background Smartphone applications have become popular tools in clinical educational environments, particularly because they enhance learning in any setting through their accessibility. Despite students utilizing these apps in their daily learning, Pakistan's medical education system has yet to strongly endorse them. Given the rising usage of medical applications among clinical year medical students and the wide range of apps accessible on contemporary devices aimed specifically at the student population, there is a lack of literature addressing the use of these apps on clinical learning in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) such as Pakistan. Objectives Our study aims to (1) assess the level of awareness among clinical-year medical students in Pakistan, of smartphone applications for academic purposes, (2) determine the usefulness of medical apps as educational tools for clinical-year medical students, in terms of enhancing overall patient-care skills and (3) identify barriers to the usage of apps among students who do not have them installed. Methods This online questionnaire-based study includes clinical year medical students across four medical colleges (two private and two public sectors) in Pakistan. Participant identity was kept anonymous and informed consent was required to participate. A sample size of 360 was used based on previous studies in the UK and student estimates from chosen medical colleges. The questionnaire tool used consists of three sections; demographics and medical school information, perceived usefulness of medical smartphone apps on a Likert Scale and barriers to usage among students who do not have them installed. Results 97.9% of the total study population chose to participate in the study. There was roughly an equal percentage of responses from each clinical year and 72% of students reported active use of medical apps of which the vast majority (48%) have one to two apps on their phones. Only 39% of students felt that their medical colleges encourage the use of smartphone apps for academic purposes. 54% of students use apps to look up medical criteria for disease processes and almost 42% use them to search medications. On a Likert scale of 1-5, improvement of clinical performance received highest average score among users (3.92, SD 1.1), followed by quick access to medical guidelines (3.83, SD 1.0). The most common reasons for nonuse of medical apps were medical colleges not offering subscriptions and not knowing how to utilize apps. Conclusion Smartphone apps are widely used by clinical year medical students for academic purposes in our study. Despite lack of endorsement from their respective medical colleges, these apps are still popularly utilized for revision and research on disease criteria during clinics and rounds. Encouragement from the university has been identified as a significant barrier, however. Students who use smartphone apps reported an improvement in clinical performance overall; they were able to retrieve information quicker during rounds and noticed enhancements in formulating diagnoses and reading radiological images. In contrast, those not using these apps faced challenges with interpreting imaging results, recalling pharmacological properties of medications and developing differential diagnoses. Through these findings, we highlight the benefits of incorporating technological media into the undergraduate curriculum and hope medical universities from Pakistan can take inspiration.

Quality of life in children operated for spina bifida; low- and middle-income country perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Spina bifida is a potentially disabling congenital condition and affects the quality of life (QOL). We aimed to assess clinical outcomes and QOL in children who underwent spina bifida repair at our hospital. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study on children who underwent spina bifida repair at our hospital over 10 years. Phone calls were made to parents of the children, and the Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI 3) score was used to assess QoL, and degree of disability. Demographics and clinical data were obtained from the medical chart review. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS (version 21). RESULTS: Eighty children with a median age of 1.1 months (IQR 0.03-2.0) at the time of presentation, were included in this study. The mean follow-up period was 6.04 ± 2.54 years and the median HUI-3 score was 0.64 (IQR: 0.40 - 0.96) on a scale of 0 (dead) to 1 (perfectly healthy). Based on the severity of disability, 12 (23.1%) children had mild disability, 4 (7.7%) had moderate disability, and 23 (44.2%) had severe disability. Factors including a leaking spina bifida and paraplegia at presentation; radiological findings of hydrocephalus and Chiari malformation, were associated with a significantly low QOL. Children who required CSF diversion (EVD/ VP shunt) during the repair or at a later stage also had significantly low QOL. CONCLUSION: In LMIC, children with myelomeningocele (MMC) born with lower limb weakness, hydrocephalus, Chiari malformation, and those presenting with leaking MMC, have a significantly low QoL at a mean follow-up of 6 years.

The Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

COVID-19 has proved to be a serious, and consequential disease that has affected millions of people globally. Previously, the adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) have been observed with increasing the risk of pneumonia and COVID-19. This meta-analysis aims to address the relationship between the use of PPI and the severity of COVID-19 infection. We conducted a systemic literature search from PUBMED, Science Direct, and Cinahl from December 2019 to January 2022. Published and unpublished randomized control trials and cohort studies were included. Review Manager was used for all statistical analyses. In total, 14 studies were included in this systemic review and meta-analysis. Outcomes of interest include: (1) susceptibility of COVID-19 infection and (2) severity of COVID-19 (defined as the composite of poor outcomes: ICU admission, need for oxygen therapy, need for a ventilator, or death), and (3) mortality due to COVID-19. PPI use was marginally associated with a nominal but statistically significant increase in the risk of COVID-19 infection (OR 1.05 [1.01, 1.09]; I2 97%, p = 0.007). PPI use also increased the risk of the composite poor outcome (OR 1.84 [1.71, 1.99]; I2 98%, p < 0.00001) and mortality (OR 1.12 [1.00, 1.25]; I2 84%, p = 0.05) in patients with COVID-19.