METHODS: A web-based survey was sent to neonatologists from 16 provinces representing 59.6% (824.2 million) of the total population of China on October 2015 and December 2017.
RESULTS: A total of 117 and 219 responses were received in 2015 and 2017, respectively. Compared to 2015, respondents in 2017 were more likely to resuscitate infants <25 weeks of gestation (86% vs. 72%; p < 0.05), but few would resuscitate infants ≤23 weeks of gestation in either epoch (10% vs. 6%). In both epochs, parents were responsible for >50% of the costs of intensive care, but in 2017, significantly fewer clinicians would cease intensive care (75% vs. 88%; p < 0.05) and more would request for economic aid (40% vs. 20%; p < 0.05) if parents could not afford to pay. Resource availability (e.g. ventilators) was not an important factor in either initiation or continuation of intensive care (~60% in both epochs).
CONCLUSION: Cost is an important factor in the initiation and continuation of neonatal intensive care in a developing country like China. Such factors need to be taken into consideration when interpreting outcome data from these regions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Snakebite patients were prospectively recruited between 2017 and 2019. All patients were examined with POCUS to locate edema and directly visualize and measure the arterial flow in the compressed artery. The presence of DRAF in the compressed artery is suggestive of ACS development because when compartment space restriction occurs, increased retrograde arterial flow is observed in the artery.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven snakebite patients were analyzed. Seventeen patients (63%) were bitten by Crotalinae snakes, seven (26%) by Colubridae, one (4%) by Elapidae, and two (7%) had unidentified snakebites. All Crotalinae bit patients received antivenom, had subcutaneous edema and lacked DRAF in a POCUS examination series.
DISCUSSION: POCUS facilitates clinical decisions for snakebite envenomation. We also highlighted that the anatomic site of the snakebite is an important factor affecting the prognosis of the wounds. There were limitations of this study, including a small number of patients and no comparison with the generally accepted invasive evaluation for ACS.
CONCLUSIONS: We are unable to state that POCUS is a valid surrogate measurement of ACS from this study but see this as a starting point to develop further research in this area. Further study will be needed to better define the utility of POCUS in patients envenomated by snakes throughout the world.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients with AML excluding acute promyelocytic leukemia were retrospectively analyzed. Patients in the earlier cohort (n = 36) were treated on the Medical Research Council (MRC) AML12 protocol, whereas those in the recent cohort (n = 26) were treated on the Malaysia-Singapore AML protocol (MASPORE 2006), which differed in terms of risk group stratification, cumulative anthracycline dose, and timing of hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for high-risk patients.
RESULTS: Significant improvements in 10-year overall survival and event-free survival were observed in patients treated with the recent MASPORE 2006 protocol compared to the earlier MRC AML12 protocol (overall survival: 88.0% ± 6.5% vs 50.1% ± 8.6%, P = .002; event-free survival: 72.1% ± 9.0 vs 50.1% ± 8.6%, P = .045). In univariate analysis, patients in the recent cohort had significantly lower intensive care unit admission rate (11.5% vs 47.2%, P = .005) and numerically lower relapse rate (26.9% vs 50.0%, P = .068) compared to the earlier cohort. Multivariate analysis showed that treatment protocol was the only independent predictive factor for overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.73, P = .014).
CONCLUSION: Outcomes of pediatric AML patients have improved over time. The more recent MASPORE 2006 protocol led to significant improvement in long-term survival rates and reduction in intensive care unit admission rate.
METHODS: 28 experts from 11 countries reviewed the evidence and modified the statements using the Delphi method, with consensus level predefined as ≥80% of agreement on each statement. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was followed.
RESULTS: Consensus was reached in 26 statements. At an individual level, eradication of H. pylori reduces the risk of GC in asymptomatic subjects and is recommended unless there are competing considerations. In cohorts of vulnerable subjects (eg, first-degree relatives of patients with GC), a screen-and-treat strategy is also beneficial. H. pylori eradication in patients with early GC after curative endoscopic resection reduces the risk of metachronous cancer and calls for a re-examination on the hypothesis of 'the point of no return'. At the general population level, the strategy of screen-and-treat for H. pylori infection is most cost-effective in young adults in regions with a high incidence of GC and is recommended preferably before the development of atrophic gastritis and intestinal metaplasia. However, such a strategy may still be effective in people aged over 50, and may be integrated or included into national healthcare priorities, such as colorectal cancer screening programmes, to optimise the resources. Reliable locally effective regimens based on the principles of antibiotic stewardship are recommended. Subjects at higher risk of GC, such as those with advanced gastric atrophy or intestinal metaplasia, should receive surveillance endoscopy after eradication of H. pylori.
CONCLUSION: Evidence supports the proposal that eradication therapy should be offered to all individuals infected with H. pylori. Vulnerable subjects should be tested, and treated if the test is positive. Mass screening and eradication of H. pylori should be considered in populations at higher risk of GC.
METHODS: We conducted focus groups among healthy English-speaking Malay women in Singapore, aged 40 to 69 years, using a structured guide developed through literature review, expertise input and participant refinement. Thematic analysis was conducted to extract dominant themes representing key motivators and barriers to screening and genetic testing. We used grounded theory to interpret results and derive a framework of understanding, with implications for improving uptake of services.
RESULTS: Five focus groups (four to six participants per group) comprising 27 women were conducted to theme saturation. Major themes were (a) spiritual and religious beliefs act as barriers towards uptake of screening and genetic testing; (b) preference for traditional medicine competes with Western medicine recommendations; (c) family and community influence health-related decisions, complexed by differences in intergenerational beliefs creating contrasting attitudes towards screening and prevention.
CONCLUSIONS: Decisions to participate in breast cancer screening and genetic testing are influenced by cultural, traditional, spiritual/religious, and intergenerational beliefs. Strategies to increase uptake should include acknowledgement and integration of these beliefs into counseling and education and collaboration with key influential Malay stakeholders and leaders.