METHODS: This was a descriptive case study conducted in three selected small footwear factories located in Ciomas, Bogor, Indonesia. The assessment was conducted using the chemical health risk assessment method by the Department of Safety and Health Malaysia Year 2018.
RESULTS: Results showed that the level of risk of chemicals through inhalation fell on the moderate and high-risk categories, indicating that high exposure could lead to carcinogenic effects. Dermal exposure was categorised as moderate risk, causing such health effects as skin and eye irritation.
CONCLUSION: Factory X, Y, and Z have been found to have a significant risk of hazardous chemical exposure (i.e., benzene and toluene), specifically at the glueing stations, either from inhalation or dermal contact.
METHOD: Variables included in our model are categorized into four pillars: (i) incidence of cases, (ii) reliability of case data, (iii) vaccination, and (iv) variant surveillance. These measures are combined based on weights that reflect their corresponding importance in risk assessment within the context of the pandemic to calculate the risk score for each country. As a validation step, the outcome of the risk stratification from our model is compared against four countries.
RESULTS: Our model is found to have good agreement with these benchmarked risk designations for 27 out of the top 30 countries with the strongest travel ties to Malaysia (90%). Each factor within this model signifies its importance and can be adapted by governing bodies to address the changing needs of border control policies for the recommencement of international travel.
CONCLUSION: In practice, the proposed model provides a turnkey solution for nations to manage transmission risk by enabling stakeholders to make informed, evidence-based decisions to minimize fluctuations of imported cases and serves as a structure to support the improvement, planning, and activation of public health control measures.
METHODS: The purpose of this research was to identify the source of information, travel benefits and perceived risks related to movement of international patients and develop a conceptual model based on well-established theory. Thorough database search (Science Direct, utmj.org, nih.gov, nchu.edu.tw, palgrave-journals, medretreat, Biomedcentral) was performed to fulfill the objectives of the study.
RESULTS: International patients always concern about benefits and risks related to travel. These benefits and risks form images of destination in the minds of international patients. Different sources of information make international patients acquaint about the associated benefits and risks, which later leads to development of intention to visit. This conceptual paper helps in establishing model for decision-making process of international patients in developing visit intention.
CONCLUSION: Ample amount of literature is available detailing different factors involved in travel decision making of international patients; however literature explaining relationship between these factors is scarce.
AREAS COVERED: We searched multiple databases, including PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, ACM, Embase, IEEE and Ingenta. We explored various evaluation aspects of MD and EMR to gain a better understanding of their complex integration. We reviewed numerous risk management and assessment frameworks related to MD and EMR security aspects and mitigation controls and then identified their common evaluation aspects. Our review indicated that previous evaluation frameworks assessed MD and EMR independently. To address this gap, we proposed an evaluation framework based on the sociotechnical dimensions of health information systems and risk assessment approaches for MDs to evaluate MDI-EMR integratively.
EXPERT OPINION: The emergence of MDI-EMR cyber threats requires appropriate evaluation tools to ensure the safe development and application of MDI-EMR. Consequently, our proposed framework will continue to evolve through subsequent validations and refinements. This process aims to establish its applicability in informing stakeholders of the safety level and assessing its effectiveness in mitigating risks for future improvements.
Context: The survey is nationally representative and community based and is conducted by the Institute for Public Health, part of the National Institutes of Health, to generate health-related evidence and to support the Malaysian Ministry of Health in policy-making. Its planned scope for 2020 was the seroprevalence of communicable diseases such as hepatitis B and C.
Action: Additional components were added to the survey to increase its usefulness, including COVID-19 seroprevalence and facial anthropometric studies to ensure respirator fit. The survey's scale was reduced, and data collection was changed from including only face-to-face interviews to mainly self-administered and telephone interviews. The transmission risk to participants was reduced by screening data collectors before the survey and fortnightly thereafter, using standard droplet and contact precautions, ensuring proper training and monitoring of data collectors, and implementing other administrative infection prevention measures.
Outcome: Data were collected from 7 August to 11 October 2020, with 5957 participants recruited. Only 4 out of 12 components of the survey were conducted via face-to-face interview. No COVID-19 cases were reported among data collectors and participants. All participants were given their hepatitis and COVID-19 laboratory test results; 73 participants with hepatitis B and 14 with hepatitis C who had been previously undiagnosed were referred for further case management.
Discussion: Preparing and conducting the National Health and Morbidity Survey during the COVID-19 pandemic required careful consideration of the risks and benefits, multiple infection prevention measures, strong leadership and strong stakeholder support to ensure there were no adverse events.
METHOD: We estimated the two conditions for a Zika outbreak emergence in Southeast Asia: (i) the risk of Zika introduction from Latin America and the Caribbean and, (ii) the risk of autochthonous transmission under varying assumptions on population immunity. We also validated the model used to estimate the risk of introduction by comparing the estimated number of Zika seeds introduced into the United States with case counts reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
RESULTS: There was good agreement between our estimates and case counts reported by the CDC. We thus applied the model to Southeast Asia and estimated that, on average, 1-10 seeds were introduced into Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. We also found increasing population immunity levels from 0 to 90% reduced probability of autochthonous transmission by 40% and increasing individual variation in transmission further reduced the outbreak probability.
CONCLUSIONS: Population immunity, combined with heterogeneity in transmission, can explain why no large-scale outbreak was observed in Southeast Asia during the 2015-16 epidemic.
METHODS: Matching variables from the Towards Useful Aging and Malaysian Elders Longitudinal Research datasets related to falls, physical performance and determinants of falls were identified and pooled for analysis. The Timed Up and Go test and dominant handgrip strength tests were used as physical performance measures. Falls were self-reported, and functional status was assessed using activities of daily living.
RESULTS: Data of 3935 participants, mean age 68.9 ± 6.8 years, 2127 (54.0%) women and 1807 (46.0%) men were extracted for analyses. In an adjusted model, independent risk factors for falls from this cohort studies were diabetes (OR 1.258), arthritis (OR 1.366), urinary incontinence (OR 1.346), poor self-rated health (OR 1.293), higher body mass index (OR 1.029) and lower handgrip strength (OR 1.234).
CONCLUSIONS: Although the risk factors that emerged from our analyses were similar to available studies among older adults, the Timed Up and Go test did not appear as one of the risk factors in the present study that included middle-aged adults. Our findings will require confirmation in a prospective study. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2019; 19: 798-803.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to describe trends in maternal pre-pregnancy hypertension among women in rural and urban areas in 2007 to 2018 in order to inform community-engaged prevention and policy strategies.
METHODS: We performed a nationwide, serial cross-sectional study using maternal data from all live births in women age 15 to 44 years between 2007 and 2018 (CDC Natality Database). Rates of pre-pregnancy hypertension were calculated per 1,000 live births overall and by urbanization status. Subgroup analysis in standard 5-year age categories was performed. We quantified average annual percentage change using Joinpoint Regression and rate ratios (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) to compare yearly rates between rural and urban areas.
RESULTS: Among 47,949,381 live births to women between 2007 and 2018, rates of pre-pregnancy hypertension per 1,000 live births increased among both rural (13.7 to 23.7) and urban women (10.5 to 20.0). Two significant inflection points were identified in 2010 and 2016, with highest annual percentage changes between 2016 and 2018 in rural and urban areas. Although absolute rates were lower in younger compared with older women in both rural and urban areas, all age groups experienced similar increases. The rate ratios of pre-pregnancy hypertension in rural compared with urban women ranged from 1.18 (95% CI: 1.04 to 1.35) for ages 15 to 19 years to 1.51 (95% CI: 1.39 to 1.64) for ages 40 to 44 years in 2018.
CONCLUSIONS: Maternal burden of pre-pregnancy hypertension has nearly doubled in the past decade and the rural-urban gap has persisted.
METHODS: A simulated patient method was used to evaluate pharmacist counseling practices in Sydney, Australia. Twenty community pharmacists received three simulated patient visits concerning antidepressant adherence-related scenarios at different phases of treatment: 1) patient receiving a first-time antidepressant prescription and hesitant to begin treatment; 2) patient perceiving lack of treatment efficacy for antidepressant after starting treatment for 2 weeks; and 3) patient wanting to discontinue antidepressant treatment after 3 months due to perceived symptom improvement. The interactions were recorded and analyzed to evaluate the content of consultations in terms of information gathering, information provision including key educational messages, and treatment recommendations.
RESULTS: There was variability among community pharmacists in terms of the extent and content of information gathered and provided. In scenario 1, while some key educational messages such as possible side effects and expected benefits from antidepressants were mentioned frequently, others such as the recommended length of treatment and adherence-related messages were rarely addressed. In all scenarios, about two thirds of pharmacists explored patients' concerns about antidepressant treatment. In scenarios 2 and 3, only half of all pharmacists' consultations involved questions to assess the patient's medication use. The pharmacists' main recommendation in response to the patient query was to refer the patient back to the prescribing physician.
CONCLUSION: The majority of pharmacists provided information about the risks and benefits of antidepressant treatment. However, there remains scope for improvement in community pharmacists' counseling practice for patients on antidepressant treatment, particularly in providing key educational messages including adherence-related messages, exploring patients' concerns, and monitoring medication adherence.