Viability of cultured mammalian cells is evaluated by a variety of techniques. In this study, experimental results
of fast cell viability assays were compared to reveal the most suitable method for determination of
hyperthermia effect on viability of human breast cancer Michigan Cancer Foundation-7 (MCF-7) cell line. The
cells were exposed to heat at 42˚C for 2 hours to estimate the percentage of cell viability using four assays
(trypan blue, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and crystal violet, (CV). There was a mild decrease in percentage
of cell viability as the duration of heat exposure increased. Of the three counting techniques, the crystal violet
nuclei showed consistent and significantly higher value (70.58±1.97) than trypan blue and LDH assay
(81.07±20.12 and 77.06±11.84 respectively) (p< 0.05). This study reveals that CVwas the most sensitive assay
for adherent cell. It is also very effective; simple; and permits many samples to be analyzed rapidly and
simultaneously.
Background:The challenge of recognizing ward-based patients at risk of deterioration is discussed
frequently within the relevant literature. Nurses in particular hold the prime position to identify problems at
an early stage using systematic patient assessment. However, general ward nurses' perceived knowledge,
attitudes, and practice related to assessment of the risk of deterioration are not well understood. Failures to
recognize or act upon the deterioration of general ward patients has sometimes resulted in the implementation
of early warning scoring systems and Critical Care Outreach teams.
Aim: The study aim to explore general ward nurses' perceived knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) in
assessing patients at risk of deteriorating in general wards.
Method: ACross-sectional study design with Modified Early Warning Score questionnaire for general ward
nurses was done in one tertiary hospital in Malaysia in 2013 and 2014.
Results: General ward nurses perceived that they struggled with knowledge and attitude, but they feel they
performed good practice in assessing patients at risk for deterioration. Nevertheless, the study finding shows
otherwise. Only one respondent achieved 'grade B' (85%) and the remainder scored in the band 'grade F'
(very poor). The respondents' attitude was measured by their perception of their levels of confidence and
concern. The mean confidence level was greater than six out of 10 for all categories. The attitudes mean score
± SD was set at 42.02 ±7.76. The data showed that 51% (N=50) scored below mean core of 42.02. However,
participants' overall mean score ±SD for perceptions of practice (risk of deterioration assessment) was 90.27
± 21.87 (6.94+/-1.683). The majority of participants awarded themselves a score between eight and nine,
which is in the 'good' range for the scale (0-2 weak; 3-5 moderate; 6-8 good; 9-10 excellent). Those who
scored above it were classified as having a good attitude.
Conclusion: A need exists for general ward nurses to gain a knowledge foundation in detecting abnormality
to address lack of confidence, poor attitude and alertness, and concern.
Meta-analysis is a subset of systematic review; a technique for systematically combining pertinent qualitative
and quantitative study data from numerous selected studies to broaden a single conclusion that has more
statistical power. This inference is statistically stronger than the analysis of any single study, due to increase
numbers of topics, greater variety amongst subjects, or collected effects and outcomes. The aim of this review
article is to highlight the definition, history, purpose, characteristics, use, advantage, disadvantage, validity,
and steps in conducting meta-analysis.
Background: Technological diversity management in the manufacturing of advanced medical devices is
essential. The manufacturing industries of medical devices should act in accordance with the technical
guidelines and regulations in order to ensure best practices with the use of devices in hospitals
Aim: To explore safety hazards, cost implications, and social and ethical standards to be considered during
the manufacturing of advanced medical devices
Subject and Methods: Aqualitative descriptive study was used. There was no targeted sample in the current
study whereby secondary data were used to explore the research topic. Secondary sources were obtained
from databases including EBSCOHOST, PubMed, ProQuest, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. Peerreviewed
articles, journals, books, conference proceedings, and other web publications were used to gather
relevant data.
Results: The current study indicated that the technological diversity management of advanced medical
devices is associated with safety hazards like security threats, integrity problems, and medical errors. The
study also showed that high cost of standardizations, supply, and purchase of advanced medical devices is a
huge burden faced by the manufacturers andusers. The study showed that the regulation of the medical
devices, certification, and post-market surveillanceare essential social and ethical considerations during the
manufacturing process of the new medical devices.
Conclusion: The current study explored the technological diversity of advanced medical devices. It is
evident in the current study that technology diversity of medical devices is associated with safety hazards
and cost implications. The study disclosed that taking into account social and ethical issues aid in
manufacturing safe and high quality medical devices.
Background: The identification, situation, background, assessment and recommendation (ISBAR) is a handoff tool that plays an important role in transferring responsibility and accountability in patient care from outgoing shifts to incoming shifts. Many researchers believe that handoff is very important among nurses. Nurses had the responsibility to ensure patients' correct information which were shared among themselves during handoff. It also delivers the best patient care by improving the transfer of clinical information globally and systematically. Purpose: The aim of the study is to determine nurse's perception and compliance on ISBAR tool for handoff communication in tertiary hospital, Dammam. Method: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted in oncology unit at tertiary hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Total sample size was 70. Questionnaire was the instrument tool in the study to measure nurse's perception and compliance on ISBAR tools. Result: The overall perception mean score achieved was 38.64±1.455 and compliance score was 7.73±0.588. This showed nurses had good perception and compliance on ISBAR tools and none of them had poor perception and compliance regarding the same. There was statistically significant relationship (P=0.000) between perception and compliance on ISBAR tools. Conclusion: ISBAR is reliable and effective handoff communication tools to promote patient safety. However, continuous education should be maintained to ensure all nurses competent in ISBAR tool. Further studies will be necessary to evaluate relationship between nurses' perception and compliance on ISBAR tool.