Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País como assunto
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Future Oncol ; 17(35): 4871-4882, 2021 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34472365

RESUMO

Objective: Our study goal was to evaluate the behavioral response and practices of cancer patients to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Middle East and north Africa. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a validated anonymous 45-question survey administered via SurveyMonkey® to cancer patients in 13 centers in Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Results: During the study period (from 21 April to 30 May 2020), 3642 patients participated in the study. The majority of patients (84.81%) were worried about contracting the infection. The reported strict adherence to precautions included avoiding the following actions: hand-shaking (77.40%), hugging and kissing (82.89%), social gathering (90.09%), meeting friends (84.68%) and visiting markets (75.65%). In a multivariate analysis, patients with poor precautionary practices were about twice as likely to cancel their medical appointment or a treatment session. Conclusion: Improving cancer patients' knowledge of and adherence to precautionary measures is needed not just to reduce the risk of acquiring infection but also to minimize the interruption of their medical care.


Lay abstract COVID-19 poses a higher risk for patients with cancer than other patients; therefore, it is prudent that they adhere to precautionary measures to protect themselves from the infection. We conducted a study to evaluate the behaviors and practices of these patients in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Middle, East and North Africa. We developed a survey of 45 questions that was distributed in 13 centers in Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco and Saudi Arabia between 21 April and 30 May 2020. About 85% of the 3642 patients who participated in the study were worried about contracting the infection. A substantial percentage of them (10­30%) were not adhering to various precautions and social distancing rules. On the other hand, 16% of them canceled medical appointments and 12% canceled treatment sessions. Our study showed the need for better adherence of patients with cancer to the infection precautions and most importantly, the need to have a better compliance with their treatment plans, such as keeping their scheduled appointments, to avoid harms from treatment delays.


Assuntos
Ansiedade/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ansiedade/complicações , Ansiedade/psicologia , Ansiedade/virologia , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/psicologia , COVID-19/virologia , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Marrocos/epidemiologia , Neoplasias/complicações , Neoplasias/psicologia , Neoplasias/virologia , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidade , Arábia Saudita/epidemiologia , Inquéritos e Questionários , Adulto Jovem
2.
J Immunother Precis Oncol ; 7(2): 82-88, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38721403

RESUMO

Introduction: Despite extensive studies of the impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer, there is a dearth of information from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Our study aimed to report pertinent MENA COVID-19 and Cancer Registry (MCCR) findings on patient management and outcomes. Methods: MCCR was adapted from the American Society of Clinical Oncology COVID-19 Registry to collect data specifically from patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection from 12 centers in eight countries including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Algeria, United Arab Emirates, and Morocco. The Registry included data on patients and disease characteristics, treatment, and patient outcomes. Logistic regression was used to assess associations with mortality. Results: Between November 29, 2020, and June 8, 2021, data were captured on 2008 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from the beginning of the pandemic. Median age was 56 years (16-98), 56.4% were females, and 26% were current or ex-smokers. Breast cancer (28.5%) was the leading diagnosis and 50.5% had metastatic disease. Delays of planned treatment (>14 days) occurred in 80.3% for surgery, 48.8% for radiation therapy, and 32.9% for systemic therapy. Significant reduction in the delays of all three treatment modalities occurred after June 1, 2020. All-cause mortality rates at 30 and 90 days were 17.1% and 23.4%, respectively. All-cause mortality rates at 30 days did not change significantly after June 1, 2020; however, 90-day mortality increased from 33.4% to 42.9% before and after that date (p = 0.015). Multivariable regression analysis showed the following predictors of higher 30- and 90-day mortality: age older than 70 years, having metastatic disease, disease progression, and being off chemotherapy. Conclusion: Patients with cancer in the MENA region experienced similar risks and outcome of COVID-19 as reported in other populations. Although there were fewer treatment delays after June 1, 2020, 90-day mortality increased, which may be attributed to other risk factors such as disease progression or new patients who presented with more advanced disease.

3.
Saudi Med J ; 43(2): 202-207, 2022 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35110346

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of peer-assisted learning (PAL) and expert-assisted learning (EAL) in terms of knowledge gain in virtual chest x-ray (CXR) interpretations. The secondary objective was to assess students' satisfaction levels between both groups. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, second-year medical students who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to the PAL and EAL groups. The study was carried out from December 2020 to February 2021 at Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia. The primary endpoint was the difference in the students' scores, which were determined by an independent reviewer. The secondary endpoint was students' satisfaction levels. RESULTS: A total of 166 second year medical students were included. The standard deviation and mean age of the population were 19.73±0.66 (males: 79 [47.6%]; females: 87 [52.4%]). Participants were allocated equally into two groups (83 in each group). Student scores did not differ significantly between the two groups (p=0.507). Students in the PAL group thought the session was useful (p=0.01), kept on time (p=0.043), and the tutor facilitated their learning process (p=0.011). They also felt that online teaching was as effective as traditional teaching (p=0.03). There was no significant difference in satisfaction scores on the other aspects of the questionnaire. CONCLUSION: Peer-assisted learning has equivalent efficacy compared to EAL in a virtual setting. The Students in the PAL group had higher level of satisfaction.


Assuntos
Educação de Graduação em Medicina , Estudantes de Medicina , Feminino , Humanos , Aprendizagem , Masculino , Grupo Associado , Raios X
4.
J Taibah Univ Med Sci ; 16(4): 612-618, 2021 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33815034

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This study examines the Saudi Arabian population's willingness to participate in clinical trials for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, comparing recovered cases' willingness with that of healthy volunteers. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted on the Saudi Arabian population during September 2020. The data were collected from recovered COVID-19 participants as the case group, and healthy volunteers as the control group. RESULTS: The data showed that 42.2% (n = 315) of recovered COVID-19 cases were more willing to participate in the COVID-19 vaccine trial than healthy volunteers (299; 38.1%) with a p < 0.001. The proportion of the participants who were willing to donate plasma was significantly higher among recovered participants, 84.2% (n = 112), than healthy volunteers, 76.3% (n = 87), with a p < 0.0001. The most significant factor responsible for a willingness to participate was the belief that vaccine discovery would help scientific developments (r = 0.525 and 0.465 for case and control, respectively). In comparison, significant reasons behind the unwillingness to participate were the risk of exposure to an unproven vaccine, r = 0.377 and 0.497 for case and control, respectively (p < 0.001), and a discomfort with being treated as an experimental subject (r = 0.275 and 0.374 for case and control, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The differences in readiness toward the COVID-19 vaccine trial in our study does not indicate any passive exposure of participants to an unproven clinical trial vaccine, nor does it shed light on well-informed risk-related decisions. However, certain factors can significantly influence decision-making while contributing toward clinical research. This study's results must not be used for the individuals' recruitment bias in a COVID-19 vaccine trial.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa