METHODS: In this non-randomized pilot study, [99mTc]NaTcO4 gastric SPECT/CT (250 mL protocol) and proximal gastric HRM-NDT (~60 mL/min protocol) were performed separately within 30 days using Ensure Gold test meal (1.05 kcal/mL; Abbott). GA parameters were measured, and their preliminary associations were examined using Spearman's ρ and Hoeffding's D correlation tests. Data were presented as median ± normalized median absolute deviation.
KEY RESULTS: Twenty healthy, asymptomatic individuals (11 females; 23.5 ± 2.2 years, 23.7 ± 2.2 kg/m2) completed both procedures without serious adverse events and interrupted sessions. The accommodation volume and postprandial-to-fasting volume ratio from SPECT/CT were 325.8 ± 28.5 mL and 5.31 ± 1.28, respectively. During HRM-NDT, the nadir-intragastric pressure (IGP) was -6.6 ± 3.6 mmHg at an ingested volume of 360.0 ± 177.9 mL, and the area-under-curve of IGP was -1566.0 ± 1596.8 mmHg·mL. The maximum tolerated volume for reaching satiety/maximum discomfort was 450.0 ± 177.9 mL, and the area-under-curve of satiation score was 900.0 ± 266.9 satiation-unit·mL. The area-under-curve of IGP showed significant associations with maximum tolerated volume (ρ: -0.702; D: 0.234) and the area-under-curve of satiation score (D: 0.119): all p
METHODS: Of 84 screened participants, 60 asymptomatic healthy Asian population (38 females; 24.0 ± 1.5 years; 23.8 ± 2.6 kg/m2) were recruited in this 2 × 2 (AB/BA) crossover trial. Participants were randomized to a 4-h GES with 99mTc-radiolabeled EWM (~255.8 kcal), followed by a 200 mL Vital® (300 kcal), or vice versa, separated by a 2-week washout period. Global meal retention (GMR), power-exponential model emptying parameters (half-emptying [T1/2], lag phases [Tlag2%, Tlag5%, Tlag10%]), and IMD0h were determined and compared.
RESULTS: GMRs for both test meals were within the international standard references for solid GES. Compared to EWM, Vital® exhibited significantly lower GMRs (faster emptying) from 0.5 to 3 h (all P
METHODS: From May to July 2019, a cross-sectional study was conducted among registered general practitioners (GPs) in Indonesia. A contingent valuation method was employed to evaluate the WTP. Besides acceptance and WTP, various explanatory variables were also collected and assessed. A logistic regression and a multivariable linear regression were used to explore the explanatory variables influencing acceptance and WTP, respectively.
RESULTS: Among 407 respondents, 391 (96.0%) expressed acceptance of a free vaccination. The mean and median WTP was US$ 37.0(95%CI:US$ 32.76-US$ 41.23) and US$ 17.90(95%CI:US$ 17.90-US$ 17.90), respectively. In an unadjusted analysis, those 30 years old or younger had 2.94 times greater odds of vaccine acceptance compared to those who were older (95%CI: 1.07-8.08). Location of alma mater, type of workplace, length of individual medical experience, and monthly income of GPs were all significantly associated with WTP.
CONCLUSION: Although the vast majority of GPs would accept a freely provided vaccine, they were also somewhat price sensitive. This finding indicates that partial subsidy maybe required to achieve high vaccine coverage, particularly among GPs at community health centres or those with a shorter duration of medical practice.
METHODS: We conducted a health facility-based cross-sectional study in Aceh and West Sumatra province from 1 February to 13 June 2018. Patients who visited outpatient departments, have had children or were expecting their first child, were approached and interviewed to collect information on acceptance, WTP, demographic and socio-economic variables and attitudes towards childhood vaccines. Associations of explanatory variables influencing acceptance and WTP were assessed using logistic regression and linear regression analysis, respectively.
RESULTS: In total, 956 respondents were included in the final analysis of acceptance, of whom 338 (35.3%) expressed their WTP. We found that 757 (79.1%) of the respondents were likely to be vaccinated and to recommend their partner to be vaccinated. Higher educational attainment, having a job, having heard about Zika and a good attitude towards childhood vaccination were associated with ZV acceptance in the univariate analyses. In the multivariate analysis, attitude towards childhood vaccination was the strongest predictor for ZV vaccination. We found the geometric mean and median of WTP was US$ 13.1 (95% CI: 11.37-15.09) and US$ 7.0 (95% CI: 4.47-10.98), respectively. In the final model, having heard about Zika, having a job, and higher income were associated with a higher WTP.
CONCLUSION: Although the acceptance rate of the ZV is relatively high in Indonesia, less than 40% of respondents are willing to pay, underscoring the need for a low-cost, high-quality vaccine and public sector subsidies for Zika vaccinations in the country.
METHODS: This study uses a mixed methods design. It focuses primarily on qualitative data to understand processes and strategies and to identify specific areas that can be improved through stakeholder engagement in the screening program. Quantitative data play a dual role in supporting the selection of participants for the qualitative study based on program monitoring data and assessing inequalities in screening and program implementation in healthcare facilities in Malaysia. Meanwhile, literature review identifies existing strategies to improve colorectal cancer screening. Additionally, the knowledge-to-action framework is integrated to ensure that the research findings lead to practical improvements to the colorectal cancer screening program.
DISCUSSION: Through this complex mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, this study will explore the complex interplay of population- and systems-level factors that influence screening rates. It involves identifying barriers to effective colorectal cancer screening in Malaysia, comparing current strategies with international best practices, and providing evidence-based recommendations to improve the local screening program.