METHODS: Plasma concentrations of folate, vitamins B6, B12, homocysteine and glucose were measured at 26-weeks' gestation in 913 pregnant women. GDM was diagnosed using the 1999 World Health Organization criteria. Associations were examined with linear or logistic regression, adjusted for confounders and stratified by ethnicity.
RESULTS: Higher plasma folate was associated with higher 2-h glucose and higher odds of GDM [0.15 (0.02, 0.23) per 1-SD increment in folate, OR 1.29 (1.00, 1.60)], mainly among Indian mothers. Higher plasma vitamin B12 and homocysteine were associated with lower fasting and 2-h glucose, and lower odds of GDM [-0.04 (-0.07, -0.01) per 1-SD increment in B12 and -0.09 (-0.18, -0.003) respectively, OR: 0.81 (0.68, 0.97); -0.05 (-0.08, -0.02) per 1-SD increment in homocysteine and -0.12 (-0.21, -0.02) respectively, OR: 0.76 (0.62, 0.92)]. The highest odds of GDM were observed among women with combined vitamin B12 insufficiency and high folate concentration [OR: 1.97 (1.05, 3.68)]. An association between higher vitamin B6 and higher 2-h glucose shifted towards null adjusting for other B-vitamins.
CONCLUSIONS: Higher maternal folate coupled with vitamin B12 insufficiency was associated with higher GDM risk. This finding has potential implications for antenatal supplement recommendations but will require confirmation in future studies.
METHODS: During a period when the 1999 WHO GDM criteria were in effect, pregnant women were universally screened using a one-step 75 g 2-h oral glucose tolerance test at 26-28 weeks' gestation. Women were retrospectively reclassified according to the 2013 criteria, but without the 1-h glycaemia measurement. Pregnancy outcomes and glucose tolerance at 4-5 years post-delivery were compared for women with GDM classified by the 1999 criteria alone, GDM by the 2013 criteria alone, GDM by both criteria and without GDM by both sets of criteria.
RESULTS: Of 1092 women, 204 (18.7%) and 142 (13.0%) were diagnosed with GDM by the 1999 and 2013 WHO criteria, respectively, with 27 (2.5%) reclassified to GDM and 89 (8.2%) reclassified to non-GDM when shifting from the 1999 to 2013 criteria. Compared to women without GDM by both criteria, cases reclassified to GDM by the 2013 criteria had an increased risk of neonatal jaundice requiring phototherapy (relative risk (RR) = 2.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32, 5.86); despite receiving treatment for GDM, cases reclassified to non-GDM by the 2013 criteria had higher risks of prematurity (RR = 2.17, 95% CI 1.12, 4.24), neonatal hypoglycaemia (RR = 3.42, 95% CI 1.04, 11.29), jaundice requiring phototherapy (RR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.04, 2.82), and a higher rate of abnormal glucose tolerance at 4-5 years post-delivery (RR = 3.39, 95% CI 2.30, 5.00).
CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of the 2013 WHO criteria, without the 1-h glycaemia measurement, reduced the GDM rate. Lowering the fasting glucose threshold identified women who might benefit from treatment, but raising the 2-h threshold may fail to identify women at increased risk of adverse pregnancy and future metabolic outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01174875 . Registered 1 July 2010 (retrospectively registered).
AIM: To determine TTR and the predictors of poor TTR among atrial fibrillation patients who receive warfarin therapy.
METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted at a cardiology referral center in Selangor, Malaysia. A total of 420 patients with atrial fibrillation and under follow-up at the pharmacist led Warfarin Medication Therapeutic Adherence Clinic between January 2014 and December 2018 were included. Patients' clinical data, information related to warfarin therapy, and INR readings were traced through electronic Hospital Information system. A data collection form was used for data collection. The percentage of days when INR was within range was calculated using the Rosendaal method. The poor INR control category was defined as a TTR < 60%. Predictors for poor TTR were further determined by using logistic regression.
RESULTS: A total of 420 patients [54.0% male; mean age 65.7 (10.9) years] were included. The calculated mean and median TTR were 60.6% ± 20.6% and 64% (interquartile range 48%-75%), respectively. Of the included patients, 57.6% (n = 242) were in the good control category and 42.4% (n = 178) were in the poor control category. The annual calculated mean TTR between the year 2014 and 2018 ranged from 59.7% and 67.3%. A high HAS-BLED score of ≥ 3 was associated with poor TTR (adjusted odds ratio, 2.525; 95% confidence interval: 1.6-3.9, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In our population, a high HAS-BLED score was associated with poor TTR. This could provide an important insight when initiating an oral anticoagulant for these patients. Patients with a high HAS-BLED score may obtain less benefit from warfarin therapy and should be considered for other available oral anticoagulants for maximum benefit.
METHODS: 1136 pregnant women (56.7% Chinese, 25.5% Malay and 17.8% Indian) from the Growing Up in Singapore Towards healthy Outcomes (GUSTO) birth cohort study were screened for GDM by 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at 26-28 weeks of gestation. GDM was defined using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. High-risk screening is based on the guidelines of the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.
RESULTS: Universal screening detected significantly more cases than high-risk screening [crude OR 2.2 (95% CI 1.7-2.8)], particularly for Chinese women [crude OR = 3.5 (95% CI 2.5-5.0)]. Pre-pregnancy BMI > 30 kg/m2 (adjusted OR = 3.4, 95% CI 1.5-7.9) and previous GDM history (adjusted OR = 6.6, 95% CI 1.2-37.3) were associated with increased risk of GDM in Malay women while GDM history was the only significant risk factor for GDM in Chinese women (adjusted OR = 4.7, 95% CI 2.0-11.0).
CONCLUSION: Risk factors used in high-risk screening do not sufficiently predict GDM risk and failed to detect half the GDM cases in Asian women. Asian women, particularly Chinese, should be screened to avoid under-diagnosis of GDM and thereby optimize maternal and fetal outcomes.
METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study among health care professionals who are part of the Integrated Platform for Research in Advancing Metabolic Health outcomes of Women and Children (IPRMAHO) international study group on their understanding and perception of Vitamin D screening and supplementation in pregnancy. The cross-sectional survey comprised 4 main sections: demographics, existing policies, nutrient supplementation in pregnancy and various practices on screening, treatment and perceptions, with a total of 22 questions. A total of 15 responses were obtained from attendees from distinct health facilities across eleven participating Asia-Pacific countries.
RESULTS: Majority of the surveyed hospitals (11/15, 78.6 %) did not have a national policy or regional guideline regarding Vitamin D screening and supplementation in pregnancy. More than half of respondents were (9/14, 64.3 %) were unsure of the percentage of women seen with Vitamin D deficiencies each year and were unsure of Vitamin D dosage prescribed to pregnant women with (8/15, 53.3 %) or without (6/14, 42.9 %) Vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin D was rarely prescribed in pregnancy when compared to other nutrient supplements such as folic acid and iron. Majority of respondents (9/11, 72.7 %) indicated that their hospital did not screen for Vitamin D deficiencies in pregnancy, even amongst high risk pregnant women. Nevertheless, majority of respondents indicated a need (12/15, 80.0 %) for a guideline or consensus regarding Vitamin D screening and supplementation in pregnancy.
CONCLUSION: While majority of the surveyed hospitals did not have a national policy or regional guideline regarding Vitamin D screening and supplementation in pregnancy, majority of respondents indicated a need for the policy or guideline. There were varying clinical knowledge gaps and different perceptions on Vitamin D screening and supplementation in pregnancy among healthcare professionals.
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 465 adult outpatients prescribed analgesics for cancer pain for 1 month or longer at 22 sites in Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Data on analgesic prescription and cancer characteristics were extracted from medical records. Pain intensity, sleep disturbance, and quality of life measures were recorded via questionnaires.
RESULTS: Most patients (84.4%) had stage III or IV cancer. A total of 419 patients (90.7%) were prescribed opioids; of these, 42.2% received only weak opioids, whereas 57.8% received at least one strong opioid. The mean worst pain intensity during the past 24 hours was 4.76 (standard deviation [SD], 2.47) on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain); the mean current pain intensity was 4.10 (SD, 2.61). More than half of patients (54.8%) reported sleep disturbance caused by pain in the past 7 days. The majority of patients reported problems with pain/discomfort (82.3%), usual activities (65.8%), mobility (58.2%), and anxiety/depression (56.3%). The median daily dose prescribed in oral morphine equivalents was 30 mg for both morphine and tramadol.
CONCLUSION: Despite unrelieved pain, sleep disturbance, and issues with quality of life, a notable proportion of patients were prescribed only weak opioids, and opioid doses prescribed were generally low. Efforts focused on encouragement of prescriptions with analgesic strength and/or doses proportional to the pain management needs of patients are vital to improve the status of cancer pain management in the region.
SCOPE AND APPROACH: This review aims to provide a broad view of SCRes reactive strategies for FSMEs in dealing with crises in the context of COVID-19. Attention is given to the literature on resilience in other types of supply chain and situated in the context of food settings. The factors are monitored or controlled to contribute to FSME resiliency.Key findings and conclusion: Four quadrants, i.e., (1) rapid with low cost, (2) rapid with high cost, (3) slow with low cost and (4) slow with high cost, are offered based on the limitations and the time needed to react, and the strategies of each quadrant are explained in depth. This review also provides a better understanding of and guidance on reactive strategies for SCRes as options for FSMEs in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. This review suggests future directions as extensions based on the logical flow of this review.