MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pure tone audiometry test was conducted on 263 residents of a rural village who were not exposed to noise. The pack-years of smoking were computed from the subjects' smoking history. The association between pack-years and hearing impairment was assessed. The combined effect of smoking and age on hearing impairment was determined based on prevalence rate ratio.
RESULTS: There was a statistically significant trend in the number of pack-years of smoking and age as risk factors for hearing impairment. The prevalence rates of hearing impairment for nonsmokers aged 40 years and younger, smokers aged 40 years and younger, nonsmokers older than 40 years of age, and smokers older than 40 years of age were 6.9%, 11.9%, 29.7%, and 51.3%, respectively. The prevalence rate ratio for nonsmokers aged 40 years and younger, smokers aged 40 years and younger, nonsmokers older than 40 years of age, and smokers older than 40 years of age (nonsmokers aged 40 years and younger as a reference group) was 1, 1.7, 4.3, and 7.5, respectively. The prevalence rate ratios showed a multiplicative effect of smoking and age on hearing impairment.
CONCLUSION: Age and smoking are risk factors for hearing impairment. It is clear that smoking and age have multiplicative adverse effects on hearing impairment.
METHODS: In this cohort study, we interviewed 328 women with histologically confirmed breast cancer at five medical centres in Malaysia. Times were measured from recognition of symptoms to first consultation to diagnosis and to the first definitive treatment. The event was initiation of definitive treatment. Data was analysed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression.
RESULTS: The mean age was 47.9 (standard deviation 9.4) years and 79.9% were ethnic Malays. The median follow-up time was 6.9 months. The median times for first doctor consultation, diagnosis and initiation of treatment were 2 months, 5.5 months and 2.4 weeks, respectively. The percentage of consultation delay more than a month was 66.8%, diagnosis delay more than three months was 73.2% and treatment delay more than one month was 11.6%. Factors associated with not initiating the definitive treatment were pregnancy (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 1.75; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.07, 2.88), taking complementary alternative medicine (AHR 1.45; 95% CI: 1.15, 1.83), initial refusal of mastectomy (AHR 3.49; 95% CI: 2.38, 5.13) and undergoing lumpectomy prior to definitive treatment (AHR 1.62; 95% CI: 1.16, 2.28).
CONCLUSIONS: Delays in diagnosis and consultation were more serious than treatment delays. Most respondents would accept treatment immediately after diagnosis. Respondents themselves were responsible for a large proportion of the delays. This study was successful in understanding the process of breast cancer patients' experience, from symptoms recognition to consultation, diagnosis and treatment.