Methods: A double-blinded randomised control trial involving 200 participants between the ages of 20 to 65 years old breast cancer patients was performed. Apart from those who refused participation, patients with chronic diseases and extreme baseline depression scores were also excluded. The control group received standard care twice a week from the social welfare services team facilitator compared to the intervention group that received additional psycho-education intervention programme (PEIP). The coping strategies were measured using the Brief-COPE inventory consisting of 28 items. It was administered on the second and 12th week of trial. The primary end point was compared between pre- and post-intervention. The effect of the intervention between groups, time, and covariates was measured using the generalised linear mixed model (GLMM) analysis.
Results: The mean (SD) of adaptive coping score among the intervention group increased from 5.63 (1.3) at baseline to 6.42 (1.3) at post-intervention. The mean avoidant coping score was 3.87 (1.1) at baseline but reduced to 3.69 (0.8) post-intervention. GLMM showed that women who received the intervention reported significantly higher usage of the adaptive coping strategies after attending the programme (B=0.921, p <0.001).
Conclusion: PEIP significantly improved knowledge of breast cancer patients. Thus, this programme may be considered as a part of the healthcare services in Jordan towards improving the adaptive coping strategies among breast cancer patients, which may point towards the potential for these services to increase adaptive coping strategies among patients in Jordan.
Implications for Public Health: PEIP may be considered as psychosocial intervention in public health and healthcare setting to address rising concerns on quality of care among breast cancer patients.
METHODS: This was a randomized controlled parallel-group trial in which 372 antenatal care attendees were randomly assigned to either an intervention or control group after collecting baseline data using a structured questionnaire. The intervention group received a 4-h health education on malaria, guided by a module developed based on the IMB theory, while the control group received health education on breastfeeding for a similar duration and by the same facilitator. Follow-up data were subsequently collected at 2 months and at 4 months post-intervention using the same questionnaire. The generalized linear mixed models analysis was used to determine the between-group and within-group effects of the intervention. The intention-to-treat analysis was used after missing data had been replaced. This was followed by a sensitivity analysis, where the analyses were repeated without replacing the missing values.
RESULTS: The intervention was significant in achieving a 12.75% (p
METHODS: We randomized 108 overweight and obese patients with T2D (46 M/62F; age 60 ± 10 years; HbA1c 8.07 ± 1.05%; weight 101.4 ± 21.1 kg and BMI 35.2 ± 7.7 kg/m2) into three groups. Group A met with RDN to develop an individualized eating plan. Group B met with RDN and followed a structured meal plan. Group C did similar to group B and received weekly phone support by RDN.
RESULTS: After 16 weeks, all three groups had a significant reduction of their energy intake compared to baseline. HbA1c did not change from baseline in group A, but decreased significantly in groups B (- 0.66%, 95% CI -1.03 to - 0.30) and C (- 0.61%, 95% CI -1.0 to - 0.23) (p value for difference among groups over time
METHODS: Participants with opioid and ATS dependence (N = 69) were enrolled in a pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial; all received buprenorphine/naloxone and behavioral counseling and were randomized to atomoxetine 80 mg daily (n = 33) or placebo (n = 33). The effect size of the between-group difference on the primary outcome, proportion of ATS-negative urine tests, was estimated using Cohen's d for the intention-to-treat (ITT) sample and for higher adherence subsample (≥60 days of atomoxetine or placebo ingestion).
RESULTS: Participants were all male with mean (SD) age 39.4 (6.8) years. The proportion of ATS-negative urine tests was higher in atomoxetine- compared to placebo-treated participants: 0.77 (0.63-0.91) vs. 0.67 (0.53-0.81, d = 0.26) in the ITT sample and 0.90 (0.75-1.00) vs. 0.64 (0.51-0.78, d = 0.56) in the higher adherence subsample. The proportion of days abstinent from ATS increased from baseline in both groups (p