Objectives: To continue the line of a previous publication using steroid for acute spinal cord injury (SCI) by spine surgeons from Latin America (LA) and assess the current status of methylprednisolone (MP) prescription in Europe (EU), Asia Pacific (AP), North America (NA), and Middle East (ME) to determine targets for educational activities suitable for each region.
Methods: The English version of a previously published questionnaire was used to evaluate opinions about MP administration in acute SCI in LA, EU, AP, NA, and ME. This Internet-based survey was conducted by members of AOSpine. The questionnaire asked about demographic features, background with management of spine trauma patients, routine administration of MP in acute SCI, and reasons for MP administration.
Results: A total of 2659 responses were obtained for the electronic questionnaire from LA, EU, AP, NA, and ME. The number of spine surgeons that treat SCI was 2206 (83%). The steroid was used by 1198 (52.9%) surgeons. The uses of MP were based predominantly on the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study III study (n = 595, 50%). The answers were most frequently given by spine surgeons from AP, ME, and LA. These regions presented a statistically significant difference from North America (P < .001). The number of SCI patients treated per year inversely influenced the use of MP. The higher the number of patients treated, the lower the administration rates of MP observed.
Conclusions: The study identified potential targets for educational campaigns, aiming to reduce inappropriate practices of MP administration.
Methods: This cross-sectional observational study involved 465 adults prescribed analgesics for cancer-related pain from 22 sites across Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Pain intensity, pain control satisfaction, and adequacy of analgesics for pain control were documented using questionnaires.
Results: Most patients (84.4%) had stage III or IV cancer. On a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worse pain), patients' mean worst pain intensity over 24 hours was 4.76 (SD 2.47). More physicians (19.0%) than patients (8.0%) reported dissatisfaction with patient's pain control. Concordance of patient-physician satisfaction was low (weighted kappa 0.36; 95% CI 0.03-0.24). Most physicians (71.2%) found analgesics to be adequate for pain control. Patients' and physicians' satisfaction with pain control and physician-assessed analgesic adequacy were significantly different across countries (P < 0.001 for all).
Conclusions: Despite pain-related problems with sleep and quality of life, patients were generally satisfied with their pain control status. Interestingly, physicians were more likely to be dissatisfied with patients' pain control. Enhanced patient-physician communication, physicians' proactivity in managing opioid-induced adverse effects, and accessibility of analgesics have been identified to be crucial for successful cancer pain management. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT02664987).
METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study included 75 older adults who were at least 3 months poststroke and 50 age-matched healthy controls. Depressive symptoms were quantified using the World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief version (WHOQoL-BREF). Physical function was examined using Functional Ambulation Category, grip strength, 5 times Sit-to-Stand test, and Box and Block tests. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment and visual-manual reaction time were used to index cognitive function. Depressive symptom was quantified using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. The Barthel Index and Fatigue Severity Scale were used to quantify activity limitation. Social participation and environmental participation were assessed using the Assessment of Life Habit and Craig Hospital Inventory of Environment Factors, respectively. Linear stepwise regression models were used to determine explanators for WHOQoL-BREF domain scores.
RESULTS: Individuals with stroke demonstrated significantly worse QoL on all WHOQoL-BREF domains compared with healthy controls. Stroke was a strong determinant for QoL and explained 16% to 43% of variances. Adding other outcome measures significantly improved the robustness of the models (R change = 12%-32%). The physical, psychological, social, and environmental domains of WHOQoL-BREF were all explained by the LIFE-H scores (β = -10.58, -3.37, 4.24, -5.35, respectively), while psychological, social, and environmental domains were explained by Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores (β = .47, 0.78, 0.54, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Social participation and cognition were strong determinants of QoL among urban-dwelling older adults with stroke. Social and recreational activities and cognitive rehabilitation should therefore be evaluated as potential strategies to improve the well-being of older adults affected by stroke.