OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of workplace ergonomic design or training interventions, or both, for the prevention of work-related upper limb and neck MSDs in adults.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, AMED, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), SPORTDiscus, Cochrane Occupational Safety and Health Review Group Database and Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register to July 2010, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health database, and International Occupational Safety and Health Information Centre database to November 2010.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ergonomic workplace interventions for preventing work-related upper limb and neck MSDs. We included only studies with a baseline prevalence of MSDs of the upper limb or neck, or both, of less than 25%.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We included studies with relevant data that we judged to be sufficiently homogeneous regarding the intervention and outcome in the meta-analysis. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for each comparison using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 RCTs (2397 workers). Eleven studies were conducted in an office environment and two in a healthcare setting. We judged one study to have a low risk of bias. The 13 studies evaluated effectiveness of ergonomic equipment, supplementary breaks or reduced work hours, ergonomic training, a combination of ergonomic training and equipment, and patient lifting interventions for preventing work-related MSDs of the upper limb and neck in adults.Overall, there was moderate-quality evidence that arm support with alternative mouse reduced the incidence of neck/shoulder disorders (risk ratio (RR) 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.99) but not the incidence of right upper limb MSDs (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.66); and low-quality evidence that this intervention reduced neck/shoulder discomfort (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.41; 95% CI -0.69 to -0.12) and right upper limb discomfort (SMD -0.34; 95% CI -0.63 to -0.06).There was also moderate-quality evidence that the incidence of neck/shoulder and right upper limb disorders were not reduced when comparing alternative mouse and conventional mouse (neck/shoulder RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.19 to 2.00; right upper limb RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.72), arm support and no arm support with conventional mouse (neck/shoulder RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.24; right upper limb RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.51 to 2.29), and alternative mouse with arm support and conventional mouse with arm support (neck/shoulder RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.30 to 1.12; right upper limb RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.36).There was low-quality evidence that using an alternative mouse with arm support compared to conventional mouse with arm support reduced neck/shoulder discomfort (SMD -0.39; 95% CI -0.67 to -0.10). There was low- to very low-quality evidence that other interventions were not effective in reducing work-related upper limb and neck MSDs in adults.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found moderate-quality evidence to suggest that the use of arm support with alternative mouse may reduce the incidence of neck/shoulder MSDs, but not right upper limb MSDs. Moreover, we found moderate-quality evidence to suggest that the incidence of neck/shoulder and right upper limb MSDs is not reduced when comparing alternative and conventional mouse with and without arm support. However, given there were multiple comparisons made involving a number of interventions and outcomes, high-quality evidence is needed to determine the effectiveness of these interventions clearly. While we found very-low- to low-quality evidence to suggest that other ergonomic interventions do not prevent work-related MSDs of the upper limb and neck, this was limited by the paucity and heterogeneity of available studies. This review highlights the need for high-quality RCTs examining the prevention of MSDs of the upper limb and neck.
METHODS: We systematically followed a five-step scoping review framework to identify and review relevant literature about CRC screening in LMICs, written in the English language before February 2020. We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar for studies targeting the general, asymptomatic, at-risk adult population. The TIDieR tool and an implementation checklist were used to extract data from empirical studies; and we extracted data-informed insights from policy reviews and commentaries.
RESULTS: CRC screening interventions (n = 24 studies) were implemented in nine middle-income countries. Population-based screening programmes (n = 11) as well as small-scale screening interventions (n = 13) utilised various recruitment strategies. Interventions that recruited participants face-to-face (alone or in combination with other recruitment strategies) (10/15), opportunistic clinic-based screening interventions (5/6) and educational interventions combined with screening (3/4), seemed to be the strategies that consistently achieved an uptake of > 65% in LMICs. FOBT/FIT and colonoscopy uptake ranged between 14 and 100%. The most commonly reported implementation indicator was 'uptake/reach'. There was an absence of detail regarding implementation indicators and there is a need to improve reporting practice in order to disseminate learning about how to implement programmes.
CONCLUSION: Opportunities and challenges for the implementation of CRC screening programmes were related to the reporting of CRC cases and screening, cost-effective screening methods, knowledge about CRC and screening, staff resources and training, infrastructure of the health care system, financial resources, public health campaigns, policy commitment from governments, patient navigation, planning of screening programmes and quality assurance.
METHODOLOGY: A mutlinational study was conducted from April-June 2020 involving researchers from 12 countries (Japan, Austria, U.S., Taiwan, India, Sudan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Myanmar, Vietnam and Thailand). Steps in this research consisted of carrying out open-ended questionnaires, qualitative analyses in NVivo, and a multinational meeting to reflect, exchange, and validate results. Lastly, a commuinty response model was synthesized from multinational experiences.
RESULTS: Effective communication is key in promoting collective action for preventing virus transmission. Health literacy, habits and social norms in different populations are core components of public health interventions. To enable people to stay home while sustaining livelihoods, economic and social support are essential. Countries could benefit from previous pandemic experience in their community response. Whilst contact tracing and isolation are crucial intervention components, issues of privacy and human rights need to be considered.
CONCLUSIONS: Understanding community responses to containment policies will help in ending current and future pandemics in the world.
RESULTS: There were 27 patients with 30 segments of surgery. They were 12 males and 15 females with an average age of 58.81±8.1. There was significant improvement in VAS for lower back pain from 7.11±1.31 to 3.67±1.3, VAS for leg pain from 6.81±2.19 to 1.59±1.89, ODI from 26.41±8.95 to 13.69±8.34, and JOA score from 7.63±2.87 to 13.5±1.73. A-P diameter increased 134%, lateral diameter increased 120%, lateral recess depth increased 166%, disc height increased 126%, foraminal height increased 124%, spinal canal area increased 30%. The p-values were all <0.001. The average hospital stay was 6.79±3.01 days. Complications included 1 pedicle screw malformation, 1 ALL avulsion fracture, 1 abdominal herniation, 1 venous damage, 1 failure.
CONCLUSION: XLIF surgery presents a favorable option for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. This is a minimally invasive surgical method that reduces pain, reduces bleeding, and is effective in indirectly decompressing the spinal canal both clinal and imaging.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a 3-year project in which a survey of 100 000 workers from all 13 states in Malaysia will be conducted using a web-based screening tool that is comprised of two parts: occupational disease screening tool and hazard identification, risk assessment and risk control method. Data will be collected using a multistage stratified sampling method from 500 companies, including seven critical industrial sectors. The independent variables will be sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, previous medical history, high-risk behaviour and workplace profile. The dependent variable will be the types of occupational diseases (noise-induced hearing loss, respiratory, musculoskeletal, neurotoxic, skin and mental disorders). Subsequently, suggestions of referral for medium and high-risk workers to occupational health clinics will be attained. The approved occupational health service clinics/providers will make a confirmatory diagnosis of each case as deemed necessary. Subsequently, a walk-through survey to identify workplace hazards and recommend workplace improvement measures to prevent these occupational diseases will be achieved. Both descriptive and inferential statistics will be used in this study. Simple and adjusted binary regression will be used to find the determinants of occupational diseases.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the MARA University of Technology Research Ethics Board. Informed, written consent will be obtained from all study participants. Findings will be disseminated to the Department of Occupational Health and Safety, involved industries, and through peer-reviewed publications.
Methods: This study took place at the National Heart Institute and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, between March 2013 and March 2014. A self-administered 75-item HFQOL questionnaire was designed and administrated to 164 multi-ethnic Malaysian HF patients. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to assess the instrument's construct validity. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were used to determine internal consistency.
Results: A total of 33 out of 75 items were retained in the final tool. The HFQOL questionnaire had three common factors-psychological, physical-social and spiritual wellbeing-resulting in a cumulative percentage of total variance of 44.3%. The factor loading ranges were 0.450-0.718 for psychological wellbeing (12 items), 0.394-0.740 for physical-social wellbeing (14 items) and 0.449-0.727 for spiritual wellbeing (seven items). The overall Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the questionnaire was 0.82, with coefficients of 0.86, 0.88 and 0.79 for the psychological, physical-social and spiritual wellbeing subdomains, respectively.
Conclusion: The HFQOL questionnaire was found to be a valid and reliable measure of QOL among Malaysian HF patients from various ethnic groups. Such tools may facilitate cardiac care management planning among multi-ethnic patients with HF.
METHODS: This was a clinical trial (NCT05455840) to evaluate the feasibility and safety of utilizing the da Vinci® SP system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) for trans-subxiphoid single-port surgery in patients with anterior mediastinal disease. The primary endpoints encompassed conversion rates and the secondary endpoints included the occurrence of perioperative complications.
RESULTS: Between August 2022 and April 2023, a total of 15 patients (7 men and 8 women; median age = 56 years, interquartile range [IQR]: 49 to 65 years) underwent trans-subxiphoid robotic surgery using da Vinci SP platform for maximal thymectomy (n = 2) or removal of anterior mediastinal masses (n = 13). All surgical procedures were carried out with success, with no need for conversion to open surgery or the creation of additional ports. The median docking time was 2 min (IQR: 1 to 4 min), while the console time had a median of 152 min (IQR: 95 to 191 min). There were no postoperative complications and patients experienced a median postoperative hospital stay of 2 days with no unplanned 30-day readmission.
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that trans-subxiphoid single-port robotic surgery employing the da Vinci SP system in patients with anterior mediastinal disease is clinically viable with acceptable safety and short-term outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP), applied immediately after extubation of preterm infants, reduces the incidence of extubation failure and the need for additional ventilatory support, without clinically important adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries on 22 September 2023 using a revised strategy. We searched conference abstracts and the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible trials employed random or quasi-random allocation of preterm infants undergoing extubation. Eligible comparisons were NCPAP (delivered by any device and interface) versus head box oxygen, extubation to room air, or any other form of low-pressure supplemental oxygen. We grouped the comparators under the term no continuous positive airway pressure (no CPAP).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from the included studies. Where studies were sufficiently similar, we performed a meta-analysis, calculating risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous data. For the primary outcomes that showed an effect, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence for clinically important outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS: We included nine trials (with 726 infants) in the quantitative synthesis of this updated review. Eight studies were conducted in high-income countries between 1982 and 2005. One study was conducted in Chile, which was classified as upper-middle income at the time of the study. All studies used head box oxygen in the control arm. Risk of bias was generally low. However, due to the inherent nature of the intervention, no studies incorporated blinding. Consequently, the neonatal intensive care unit staff were aware of the assigned group for each infant, and we judged all studies at high risk of performance bias. However, we assessed blinding of the outcome assessor (detection bias) as low risk for seven studies because they used objective criteria to define both primary outcomes. NCPAP compared with no CPAP may reduce the risk of extubation failure (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.76; risk difference (RD) -0.17, 95% -0.23 to -0.10; NNTB 6, 95% CI 4 to 10; I2 = 55%; 9 studies, 726 infants; low-certainty evidence) and endotracheal reintubation (RR 0.79, 95% 0.64 to 0.98; RD -0.07, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.01; NNTB 15, 95% CI 8 to 100; I2 = 65%; 9 studies; 726 infants; very low-certainty evidence), though the evidence for endotracheal reintubation is very uncertain. NCPAP compared with no CPAP may have little or no effect on bronchopulmonary dysplasia, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.68; RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.15; 1 study, 92 infants; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported neurodevelopmental outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: NCPAP may be more effective than no CPAP in preventing extubation failure in preterm infants if applied immediately after extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation. We are uncertain whether it can reduce the risk of reintubation or bronchopulmonary dysplasia. We have no information on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. Although there is only low-certainty evidence for the effectiveness of NCPAP immediately after extubation in preterm infants, we consider there is no need for further research on this intervention, which has become standard practice.