MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2008, 142 newly diagnosed patients with AR were seen and underwent skin prick testing with 90 patients completing the study.
RESULTS: Intermittent mild and moderate/severe AR were evident in 10% and 21.1% of the patients, while persistent mild and moderate/severe were seen in 20% and 48.9%, respectively. Rhinitis and asthma co-morbidity occurred in 28.8% with asthma incidence significantly higher in persistent AR (P = 0.002). There was no significant association between AR severity, city living and asthma co-morbidity. Nasal itchiness and sneezing were the main presenting complaints and were more common in intermittent AR (P <0.05). Sleep disturbance was associated with moderate-severe AR (P <0.05). Polypoidal mucosa was associated with asthma co-morbidity (P <0.05). Monosensitivity reaction occurred in 12.2% of patients and was associated with fungi sensitivity (P <0.05). Majority of patients were oligosensitive (52.8%) and polysensitive (34.4%) and were significantly associated with moderate-severe persistent AR (P <0.01). The highest positive skin prick reaction and the largest average wheal diameter were for the house dust mites and cat allergen (P <0.05).
CONCLUSION: Our results reflected the AR profiles in our country, which was comparable with typical profiles of the neighbouring country and other Mediterranean countries with a similar temperate climate.
METHODS: Seventy-seven medical doctors and eighty nurses answered a self-administered questionnaire designed to capture demographic data and information regarding abbreviation use in medical practice. Comparisons were made between doctors and nurses with regards to frequency and reasons for using abbreviations; from where abbreviations were learned; frequency of encountering abbreviations in medical practice; prevalence of medical errors due to misinterpretation of abbreviations; and their ability to correctly interpret commonly used abbreviations.
RESULTS: The use of abbreviations was highly prevalent among doctors and nurses. Time saving, avoidance of writing sentences in full and convenience, were the main reasons for using abbreviations. Doctors learned abbreviations from fellow doctors while nurses learned from fellow nurses and doctors. More doctors than nurses reported encountering abbreviations. Both groups reported no difficulties in interpreting abbreviations although nurses reported often resorting to guesswork. Both groups felt abbreviations were necessary and an acceptable part of work. Doctors outperformed nurses in correctly interpreting commonly used standard and non-standard abbreviations.
CONCLUSION: The use of standard and non-standard abbreviation in clinical practice by doctors and nurses was highly prevalent. Significant variability in interpretation of abbreviations exists between doctors and nurses.