Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Quach DT, Vilaichone RK, Luu MN, Lee YY, Ang TL, Miftahussurur M, et al.
    Helicobacter, 2023 Dec;28(6):e13018.
    PMID: 37634226 DOI: 10.1111/hel.13018
    BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant Helicobacter pylori strains are emerging in Southeast Asia. This study evaluates the region's real-world practice in H. pylori management.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS: Physicians who managed H. pylori eradication in daily practice across 10 Southeast Asian countries were invited to participate in an online questionnaire, which included questions about the local availability of antimicrobial susceptibility tests (ASTs) and their preferred eradication regimens in real-world practice. An empiric regimen was considered inappropriate if it did not follow the local guidelines/consensus, particularly if it contained antibiotics with a high reported resistance rate or was recommended not to be empirically used worldwide.

    RESULTS: There were 564 valid responses, including 314 (55.7%) from gastroenterologists (GIs) and 250 (44.3%) from non-GI physicians. ASTs were unavailable in 41.7%. In countries with low and intermediate clarithromycin resistance, the most common first-line regimen was PAC (proton pump inhibitor [PPI], amoxicillin, clarithromycin) (72.7% and 73.2%, respectively). Regarding second-line therapy, the most common regimen was bismuth-based quadruple therapy, PBMT (PPI, bismuth, metronidazole, tetracycline) (50.0% and 59.8%, respectively), if other regimens were used as first-line treatment. Concomitant therapy (PPI, amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole) (30.5% and 25.9%, respectively) and PAL (PPI, amoxicillin, levofloxacin) (22.7% and 27.7%, respectively) were favored if PBMT had been used as first-line treatment. In countries with high clarithromycin resistance, the most common first-line regimen was PBMT, but the utilization rate was only 57.7%. Alarmingly, PAC was prescribed in 27.8% of patients, ranking as the second most common regimen, and its prescription rate was higher in non-GI physicians than GI physicians (40.1% vs. 16.2%, p 

  2. Le TTB, Vasanthakumaran T, Thi Hien HN, Hung IC, Luu MN, Khan ZA, et al.
    Rev Med Virol, 2023 Jan;33(1):e2398.
    PMID: 36150052 DOI: 10.1002/rmv.2398
    The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has created great global distress. This variant of concern shows multiple sublineages, importantly B.1.1.529.1 (BA.1), BA.1 + R346K (BA.1.1), and B.1.1.529.2 (BA.2), each with unique properties. However, little is known about this new variant, specifically its sub-variants. A narrative review was conducted to summarise the latest findings on transmissibility, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and efficacy of current vaccines and treatments. Omicron has shown two times higher transmission rates than Delta and above ten times more infectious than other variants over a similar period. With more than 30 mutations in the spike protein's receptor-binding domain, there is reduced detection by conventional RT-PCR and rapid antigen tests. Moreover, the two-dose vaccine effectiveness against Delta and Omicron variants was found to be approximately 21%, suggesting an urgent need for a booster dose to prevent the possibility of breakthrough infections. However, the current vaccines remain highly efficacious against severe disease, hospitalisation, and mortality. Japanese preliminary lab data elucidated that the Omicron sublineage BA.2 shows a higher illness severity than BA.1. To date, the clinical management of Omicron remains unchanged, except for monoclonal antibodies. Thus far, only Bebtelovimab could sufficiently treat all three sub-variants of Omicron. Further studies are warranted to understand the complexity of Omicron and its sub-variants. Such research is necessary to improve the management and prevention of Omicron infection.
  3. Qarawi ATA, Ng SJ, Gad A, Luu MN, Al-Ahdal TMA, Sharma A, et al.
    Front Public Health, 2021;9:580427.
    PMID: 34277529 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.580427
    Background: The outbreak of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by a novel coronavirus (named SARS-CoV-2) has gained attention globally and has been recognized as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by the World Health Organization (WHO) due to the rapidly increasing number of deaths and confirmed cases. Health care workers (HCWs) are vulnerable to this crisis as they are the first frontline to receive and manage COVID-19 patients. In this multicenter multinational survey, we aim to assess the level of awareness and preparedness of hospital staff regarding COVID-19 all over the world. Methods: From February to March 2020, the web-based or paper-based survey to gather information about the hospital staff's awareness and preparedness in the participants' countries will be carried out using a structured questionnaire based on the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) checklist and delivered to participants by the local collaborators for each hospital. As of March 2020, we recruited 374 hospitals from 58 countries that could adhere to this protocol as approved by their Institutional Review Boards (IRB) or Ethics Committees (EC). Discussion: The awareness and preparedness of HCWs against COVID-19 are of utmost importance not only to protect themselves from infection, but also to control the virus transmission in healthcare facilities and to manage the disease, especially in the context of manpower lacking and hospital overload during the pandemic. The results of this survey can be used to inform hospitals about the awareness and preparedness of their health staff regarding COVID-19, so appropriate policies and practice guidelines can be implemented to improve their capabilities of facing this crisis and other future pandemic-prone diseases.
  4. Huy NT, Chico RM, Huan VT, Shaikhkhalil HW, Uyen VNT, Qarawi ATA, et al.
    PLoS One, 2021;16(12):e0258348.
    PMID: 34936646 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258348
    BACKGROUND: Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, there have been concerns related to the preparedness of healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to describe the level of awareness and preparedness of hospital HCWs at the time of the first wave.

    METHODS: This multinational, multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted among hospital HCWs from February to May 2020. We used a hierarchical logistic regression multivariate analysis to adjust the influence of variables based on awareness and preparedness. We then used association rule mining to identify relationships between HCW confidence in handling suspected COVID-19 patients and prior COVID-19 case-management training.

    RESULTS: We surveyed 24,653 HCWs from 371 hospitals across 57 countries and received 17,302 responses from 70.2% HCWs overall. The median COVID-19 preparedness score was 11.0 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6.0-14.0) and the median awareness score was 29.6 (IQR = 26.6-32.6). HCWs at COVID-19 designated facilities with previous outbreak experience, or HCWs who were trained for dealing with the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, had significantly higher levels of preparedness and awareness (p<0.001). Association rule mining suggests that nurses and doctors who had a 'great-extent-of-confidence' in handling suspected COVID-19 patients had participated in COVID-19 training courses. Male participants (mean difference = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.22, 0.46; p<0.001) and nurses (mean difference = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.81; p<0.001) had higher preparedness scores compared to women participants and doctors.

    INTERPRETATION: There was an unsurprising high level of awareness and preparedness among HCWs who participated in COVID-19 training courses. However, disparity existed along the lines of gender and type of HCW. It is unknown whether the difference in COVID-19 preparedness that we detected early in the pandemic may have translated into disproportionate SARS-CoV-2 burden of disease by gender or HCW type.

  5. Luu MN, Imoto A, Matsuo Y, Huy NT, Qarawi A, Alhady STM, et al.
    PLoS One, 2024;19(3):e0280144.
    PMID: 38489310 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280144
    INTRODUCTION: In the context of collective efforts taken in Japan to control the spread of COVID-19, the state of emergency and social distancing have caused a negative impact on the mental health of all residents, including foreign communities in Japan. This study aimed to evaluate the level of anxiety and its associated factors among non-Japanese residents residing in Japan during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    METHODS: A web-based survey in 13 languages was conducted among non-Japanese residents living in Japan during the COVID-19 situation. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory assessed the level of anxiety-State (STAI-S) scores prorated from its six-item version. The multivariable logistic regression using the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) method was performed to identify the associated factors of anxiety among participants.

    RESULTS: From January to March 2021, we collected 392 responses. A total of 357 valid responses were analyzed. 54.6% of participants suffered from clinically significant anxiety (CSA). In multivariable logistic model analysis, the CSA status or the high level of anxiety was associated with three factors, including having troubles/difficulties in learning or working, decreased sleep duration, and decreased overall physical health (p<0.05).

    CONCLUSION: Our study suggests several possible risk factors of anxiety among non-Japanese residents living in Japan undergoing the COVID-19 pandemic, including the troubles or difficulties in learning or working, the decrease in sleep duration, and the decrease in overall physical health.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links