OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review the typical and relatively atypical CXR manifestations of COVID-19 pneumonia in a tertiary care hospital.
METHODS: The CXRs of 136 COVID-19 patients confirmed through real-time RT-PCR from March to May 2020 were reviewed. A literature search was performed using PubMed.
RESULTS: A total of 54 patients had abnormal CXR whilst the others were normal. Typical CXR findings included pulmonary consolidation or ground-glass opacities in a multifocal, bilateral peripheral, or lower zone distribution, whereas atypical CXR features comprised cavitation and pleural effusion.
CONCLUSION: Typical findings of COVID-19 infection in chest computed tomography studies can also be seen in CXR. The presence of atypical features associated with worse disease outcome. Recognition of these features on CXR will improve the accuracy and speed of diagnosing COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: A total of 195 5- and 6-year-old preschoolers were recruited from children attending Hospital Selayang, Selangor, Malaysia, to test the app. Uncooperative children and those with visual acuity of >logMAR 0.6 were excluded. Results from parents and the screening doctor using the app (Lea symbols) to test visual acuity were compared to each other and to gold standard vision testing by an optometrist using the Lea symbols chart.
RESULTS: Children 5 years of age represented 46.7% of the study population. The mean age of parents was 37.27 ± 7.68 years. Bland-Altman scatterplot agreement between assessors mainly was within the 95% confidence interval for bilateral eyes screening. Parents obtained a sensitivity of 86.6% (right vision) and 79.5% (left vision) and specificity of 78.9% (right vision) and 71.8% (left vision). Parents took a mean of 191.2 ± 70.82 seconds for bilateral screening. The intraclass correlation coefficient between optometrist and parents in bilateral eyes screening was good (P 0.7, indicating high internal reliability of the app. Most parents (178/195 [91.3%]) strongly agreed on the app's acceptability and ease of use.
CONCLUSIONS: The AAPOS Vision Screening App used by parents is a promising tool for visual acuity screening among Malaysian preschool children and a reliable app for vision screening.
METHODS: American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a multidisciplinary, multinational panel of medical oncology, surgical oncology, surgery, gastroenterology, health technology assessment, cancer epidemiology, pathology, radiology, radiation oncology, and patient advocacy experts. The Expert Panel reviewed existing guidelines and conducted a modified ADAPTE process and a formal consensus-based process with additional experts (Consensus Ratings Group) for two round(s) of formal ratings.
RESULTS: Existing sets of guidelines from eight guideline developers were identified and reviewed; adapted recommendations form the evidence base. These guidelines, along with cost-effectiveness analyses, provided evidence to inform the formal consensus process, which resulted in agreement of 75% or more.
CONCLUSION: In nonmaximal settings, for people who are asymptomatic, are ages 50 to 75 years, have no family history of colorectal cancer, are at average risk, and are in settings with high incidences of colorectal cancer, the following screening options are recommended: guaiac fecal occult blood test and fecal immunochemical testing (basic), flexible sigmoidoscopy (add option in limited), and colonoscopy (add option in enhanced). Optimal reflex testing strategy for persons with positive screens is as follows: endoscopy; if not available, barium enema (basic or limited). Management of polyps in enhanced is as follows: colonoscopy, polypectomy; if not suitable, then surgical resection. For workup and diagnosis of people with symptoms, physical exam with digital rectal examination, double contrast barium enema (only in basic and limited); colonoscopy; flexible sigmoidoscopy with biopsy (if contraindication to latter) or computed tomography colonography if contraindications to two endoscopies (enhanced only).