Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcomes that resulted from the use of a new proposed VTE risk stratification protocol for selecting a suitable extended VTE prophylaxis for post TKR surgery patients administered in conjunction with patient education programs.
Method: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in two medical centers in Saudi Arabia. A total of 242 patients were enrolled in the study, 121 patients in each group. The experimental group (A) was assessed by using the proposed VTE risk stratification protocol and also took part in patient education programs about TKR and its complications. The control group (B) was assessed by using the 2005 Caprini risk assessment tool and no education programs were given to this group. Both groups were followed for 35 days post operation.
Results: The mean age of the participants was 65.86 (SD 8.67) and the majority of them were female 137 (56.6%). The mean body mass index of the study sample was 32.46 (SD 5.51). There were no significant differences between the two groups except for surgery type; the proportion of bilateral TKR in group A was higher than in group B (69/121 (28.5%) vs. 40/121(16.5%), p<0.05). There were no confirmed pulmonary embolism cases in the study sample and diagnosis of deep-vein thrombosis was confirmed in 12/242 (5.0%) of patients: 1/121 (0.8%) in group A and 11/121 (9.1%) in group B (p<0.05). The readmission rate for all patients was 2.5% (6/242), all of whom were in group B (p<0.05).
Conclusion: The proposed VTE risk stratification protocol that was applied in conjunction with patient education programs reduced VTE complications and readmission events, post TKR surgery. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier: NCT04031859.
METHODS: This prospective observational study was conducted at a a PMDT unit in Multan, Punjab, Pakistan. A total of 271 eligible culture positive DR-TB patients enrolled for treatment at the study site between January 2016 and May 2017 were followed till their treatment outcomes were recorded. World Health Organization's (WHO) defined criteria was used for categorizing treatment outcomes. The outcomes of cured and treatment completed were collectively placed as successful outcomes, while death, lost to follow-up (LTFU) and treatment failure were grouped as unsuccessful outcomes. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was employed for getting predictors of unsuccessful treatment outcomes. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Of the 271 DR-TB patients analysed, nearly half (51.3%) were males. The patient's (Mean ± SD) age was 36.75 ± 15.69 years. A total of 69% patients achieved successful outcomes with 185 (68.2%) patients being cured and 2 (0.7%) completed therapy. Of the remaining 84 patients with unsuccessful outcomes, 48 (17.7%) died, 2 (0.7%) were declared treatment failure, 34 (12.5%) were loss to follow up. After adjusting for confounders, patients' age > 50 years (OR 2.149 (1.005-4.592) with p-value 0.048 and baseline lung cavitation (OR 7.798 (3.82-15.919) with p-value <0.001 were significantly associated with unsuccessful treatment outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: The treatment success rate (69%) in the current study participants was below the target set by WHO (>75%). Paying special attention and timely intervention in patients with high risk of unsuccessful treatment outcomes may help in improving treatment outcomes at the study site.
METHODS: A cross-sectional investigation was conducted at General Penang Hospital, Malaysia. Demographic criteria and laboratory tests of patients were investigated. Controlled glycemia (CG) was recognized as glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≤7% depending on American Diabetes Association guidelines 2018. Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was used to estimate the confounding influence of co-morbidities and predict ES-10Y. Data was managed by IBM-SPSS 23.0.
RESULTS: A total of 400 cases categorized to (44.25%) patients with CG, and (55.75%) cases had uncontrolled glycemia (UCG). HbA1c mean in CG and UCG group was (6.8 ± 0.9 vs 9.5 ± 1.6, P-value: 0.001). Fasting blood glucose was (7 ± 2.3 vs. 9.9 ± 4.3, P-value: 0.001) in CG and UCG group. CCI was (3.38 ± 2.38 vs. 4.42 ± 2.70, P-value: 0.001) and, ES-10Y was (62% vs 46.2%, p-value: 0.001) in CG vs. UCG respectively. Spearman test indicates a negative correlation between CG and CCI (r: 0.19, p-value: 0.001). Logistic regression confirmed HbA1c as a significant predictor of CCI (r2: 0.036, P-value: 0.001). CG has a positive correlation with survival (r: 0.16, P-value: 0.001) and logistic regression of survival (r2: 0.26, P-value: 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: More than one-half of the investigated persons had UCG. Controlled HbA1c was associated with lower co-morbidities and higher ES-10Y.
AIMS: This study intended to assess the association of peripheral neuropathy with statins therapy amongst Type 2 diabetic patients.
METHODS: At Penang General Hospital, 757 cases were categorized into two groups (564 with statins therapy and 193 without statins therapy). The diagnosis of PN was investigated retrospectively for a period of 10 years (2006-2016). Confounding risk factors as age, diabetes period, hypertension, glycemic control, other co-morbidity, and prescriptions were matched.
RESULTS: About 129 (22.9%) cases from 564 statins users had PN. Only 30 (15.5%) subjects had PN from 193 statins non-users. Chi-square test showed a significant variance among statins treatment cohort and statin-free cohort in the occurrence of PN (P-value: 0.001). Spearman's investigation presented a positive correlation (r: 0.078, p-value: 0.031) among statins use and PN prevalence. Binary logistic regression was statistically significant for statins therapy as a predictor of peripheral neuropathy incidence (r2: 0.006, p-value: 0.027) amid diabetic patients. The relative risk of peripheral neuropathy connected with statins therapy is (RR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.02-2.11). The excess relative risk is 47.1%. While the absolute risk (AR) is 7.3% and the number needed to harm (NNH) is 14.
CONCLUSIONS: The study indicated a positive association between peripheral neuropathy and statins utilization. Peripheral neuropathy was higher amongst statins users than the statins-free group.
METHOD AND ANALYSIS: A single center, prospective, randomized, parallel design, single-blind trial will be conducted in the Malaysian state of Kelantan among postdialysis euvolemic hypertensive patients that are on regular dialysis at least 3 times a week. The primary outcome of the trial will be to note the effectiveness of losartan (RAAS inhibitor) in reducing systolic BP 140 mm Hg will be randomized using Covariate Adaptive Randomization to standard or treatment arm. Participants in the treatment arm will be given 50 mg of losartan once daily except on dialysis days, whereas the standard arm patients will be prescribed non-RAAS antihypertensive agents. The study participants will be followed for a period of 12 months. A Wilcoxon statistical test will be performed to note the difference in BP from baseline up to 12 months using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 20.
ETHICAL AND TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocols are approved from the Ethical and Research Committee of the Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM/JEPeM/15050173). The trial is registered under the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12615001322527). The trial was registered on 2/12/2015 and the 1st patient was enrolled on 10/12/2015. The trial was formally initiated on 16/02/2016.
CONCLUSION: Management of HTN among HD patients requires understanding the primary cause of HTN and treating accordingly. The current trial is an attempt to reduce BP among postdialysis euvolemic but hypertensive patients.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the incidence of side effects following COVID-19 vaccination across different vaccine recipients in Southern Pakistan and identify the potential factors associated with these side effects in the population.
METHODS: The survey was conducted across Pakistan through Google-forms Links from August to October 2021. The questionnaire included demographic information and COVID-19 vaccine information. Chi-square (x2) was performed for comparative analysis to check the significance level with P <0.05. The final analysis included 507 participants who had received COVID-19 vaccines.
RESULTS: Of the total 507 COVID-19 vaccines recipients, 24.9% received CoronaVac, 36.5% received BBIBP-CorV, 14.2% received BNT162b2, 13.8% received AZD1222, and 10.7% received mRNA-1273. The most prominent side effects after the first dose were fever, weakness, lethargy, and pain at the site of injection. Moreover, the most commonly reported side effects after the second dose were pain at the injection site, headache, body ache, lethargy, fever, chills, flu-like symptoms, and diarrhea.
CONCLUSION: Our results suggested that the side effects due to COVID-19 vaccination can vary between the first and second doses and type of COVID-19 vaccine. Our findings suggest continuing monitoring of vaccine safety and the importance of individualized risk-benefit assessment for COVID-19 immunization.
Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients aged <40 or >75 years, pregnant patients, and patients with type 1 diabetes, human immunodeficiency virus, or liver cirrhosis were excluded. Demographics, laboratory parameters, and prevalence of exposure to statin therapy were evaluated. This study was guided by the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guidelines. IBM SPSS software was used for data management.
Results: The study cohort involved 576 patients, with age being 58.3 ± 8.9 years. There were 50.5% of females and 49.5% of males. Overall 81.1% of patients aged 58.8 ± 8.8 years were statin users and 18.9% of patients aged 56.2 ± 9 years were statin nonusers. About 83.2% of females and 78.9% of males were prescribed statins. Statin medications included simvastatin 79.2%, atorvastatin 11.6%, lovastatin 5.8%, rosuvastatin 2.1%, and pravastatin 1.3%. Statin users' and nonusers' adherence was 56.5%, and 41.3% (P = 0.004), respectively. The adherence to medication plan of females and males was 55.7% and 51.6%, respectively (P = 0.004).
Conclusion: Patients with diabetes who are at high risk of cardiovascular events, exposure to statin treatment is significantly less than perfect position both in females and males. Nearly one-fifth of the patients with type 2 diabetes are not using statins despite therapeutic necessities.