RESUMO
Background: Health care providers (HCPs) have always been a common target of stigmatization during widespread infections and COVID-19 is not an exception. Aim: This study aims to investigate the prevalence of stigmatization during the COVID-19 pandemic among HCPs in seven different countries using the Stigma COVID-19 Healthcare Providers tool (S19-HCPs). Design: Cross-sectional. Methods: The S19-HCPs is a self-administered online survey (16-item) developed and validated by the research team. The participants were invited to complete an online survey. Data collection started from June-July 2020 using a convenience sample of HCPs from Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Philippines, and Kuwait. Results: A total number of 1726 participants were included in the final analysis. The majority of the study participants were Jordanians (22%), followed by Kuwaitis (19%), Filipinos (18%) and the lowest participants were Indonesians (6%). Other nationalities were Iraqis, Saudis, and Egyptians with 15%, 11% and 9% respectively. Among the respondents, 57% have worked either in a COVID-19 designated facility or in a quarantine center and 78% claimed that they had received training for COVID-19. Statistical significance between COVID-19 stigma and demographic variables were found in all aspect of the S19-HCPs. Conclusion: The findings of this study demonstrated high levels of stigmatization against HCPs in all the included seven countries. On the other hand, they are still perceived positively by their communities and in their utmost, highly motivated to care for COVID-19 patients. Educational and awareness programs could have a crucial role in the solution of stigmatization problems over the world.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications can be a major catastrophic consequence of major surgeries and can lead to increased morbidity, mortality, hospital stay, and cost. Many protocols have been tried to reduce serious adverse outcomes with effective strategies including a bundle of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative techniques. Using these techniques maybe challenging in developing countries with limited resources even in specialized centers. METHODS: A before-and-after trial comparing our data from the national surgical quality improvement program (NSQIP) based on their reports. Data was collected prospectively for the patients who underwent major surgeries at King Hussein Cancer Center during the year 2017 when the use of the perioperative pulmonary care bundle was mandatory to all surgery teams and compared it with the data collected retrospectively for the patients who underwent the same type of surgeries in the year 2016 when the use of such a bundle was optional. The primary end point is the decrease in incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications. Simple descriptive statistical analysis was used to obtain results. RESULTS: The potential risk factors for postoperative pulmonary complications for 1665 patients divided into 2 groups (2016 vs. 2017); 764 (45.9%) vs. 901 (54.1%), respectively. There were no significant differences regarding gender (male 46.7% vs. 46.4%, P value = 0.891, female 53.3% vs. 53.6%, P value = 0.39), mean of age (53.5 year vs. 5.28 year, P value = 0.296), mean of body mass index (BMI) (28.6 vs. 6%, 28.6, P value = 0.95), smoking status; (69.6% vs. 65.1%, P value = 0.052), ventilator use (0.3% vs. 0.4% P value = 0.693) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (1.4% vs. 1.4 with, P value = 0.996).The data showed a significant reduction in postoperative pneumonia between the 2 groups (2016 vs. 2017) (2.7% vs. 0.9%, P value = 0.004) and showed a significant reduction in unplanned intubation, 1.4% in 2016 vs. 0.7% in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: The standardization of perioperative pulmonary care bundle, including smoking cessation, perioperative pulmonary interventions and early mobilization, significantly reduces the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in cancer patients. This technique's implementation was feasible easily even with limited resources in a developing country like Jordan.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Seroma is a common complication after axillary dissection in women with node-positive breast cancer. We aim to determine the effect of Cyanoacrylate on reducing seroma formation in patients undergoing axillary dissection. This a randomized clinical trial. METHODS: This is a single-center, randomized, single-blinded, and two-arm parallel study. Women with node-positive breast cancer eligible for axillary dissection were enrolled. Patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) greater than 35 kg/m2, those who underwent immediate breast reconstruction, and/or received neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio, and were stratified according to their age, BMI, tumor size, and operation type. The primary endpoint was the total seroma volume (the total drained volume and the total aspirated volume after drain removal). Data presented as mean and range when applicable. RESULTS: 111 patients were randomized (Cyanoacrylate 57; control 54). 105 patients were analyzed. Sixty-nine patients underwent breast conserving surgery, and 36 underwent modified radical mastectomy. There was no difference in the total seroma volume between the Cyanoacrylate vs. control arms (1,304 (60-4,950) vs. 1,446 (100-5,223) ml, p=0.458). Wound infection, flap necrosis, number of manual aspirates, and hematoma formation were not statistically different between the two groups. Time to drain removal was shorter in the Cyanoacrylate arm (11.04(3-23) vs. 13.84(3-37) days, p=0.015). The use of Cyanoacrylate was not cost effective ($586.93 (550-748) vs. $29.63 (0-198), p<0.001). Higher seroma volume was correlated with modified radical mastectomy, older age, and BMI more than 30 kg/m2. CONCLUSION: Cyanoacrylate did not reduce seroma formation and its use was not cost effective. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT02141373.
