PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between August 2019 and November 2020, a total of 96 patients (42 males, 54 females; mean age; 52.9±4.8 years; range, 40 to 60 years) were randomized into either the rehabilitation group with mobile health (RGw-mHealth) receiving reminders by using mHealth to carry on the strengthening exercises of LLRP and instructions of daily care (IDC), the rehabilitation group without mobile health (RGwo-mHealth) following the strengthening exercises of LLRP and instructions of daily care (IDC) and control group (CG) only following the IDC for duration of 12 weeks. The reminders for using mHealth were provided two times a day for three days a week. Primary outcome measures were QoL assessed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index summary score, and functional strength by five-repetition sit-to-stand test. Secondary outcome measure was functional capacity assessed by the Gait Speed Test. The assessments of QoL, functional strength, and functional capacity were taken at baseline and post-test after 12 weeks of intervention.

RESULTS: After 12 weeks of intervention, the patients in all three groups had a statistically significant improvement in QoL within groups (p<0.05). Patients in the RGw-mHealth and RGwo-mHealth had a statistically significant improvement in functional strength and walking gait speed within groups (p<0.05). The pairwise between-group comparisons (Bonferroni post-hoc test) of the mean changes in QoL, functional strength, and functional capacity at post-test assessments revealed that patients in the RGw-mHealth had a statistically significant greater mean change in QoL, functional strength and functional capacity relative to both the RGwo-mHealth and CG (p<0.001).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: This cross-sectional study was conducted from January to October 2022 using a self-administered questionnaire developed by the authors, having three sections: demographics, knowledge, and perception. The study was validated by research experts and pilot-tested on 30 subjects. The study included medical doctors, nurses, pharmacists from Punjab's government and private medical institutes.

RESULTS: In this study, 382 of 400 participants replied. The mean knowledge score was 9.52 (SD 2.97), showing that participants had adequate knowledge of COVID-19 pharmacological interventions. The knowledge scores were significantly higher of those who treated COVID-19 patients and were from Lahore. Many doctors considered that elderly patients and those with blood disorders were at greater risk of experiencing drug-related problems. Most pharmacists support electronic prescription systems. Many doctors thought the lack of unified treatment guidelines, multiple prescribers, and self-medication were key obstacles in managing COVID-19 patients.

METHODS: We recruited 48 peers (median age: 46 (IQR = 11) years old) into four peer groups, who underwent 3 months of PERSUADE, followed by 3 months of follow-up period. Statistical analyses were conducted at post-intervention and post-follow-up to assess the changes in nutrition intake, anthropometry, and metabolic parameters.

RESULTS: Although there were significant overall increases in total carbohydrate intake and glycemic load (both p < 0.001), we noted significant reductions in the intakes of total energy and fat (both p < 0.001). Physical activity (total METS/week) also showed a significant improvement (p < 0.001). Overall, significant but marginal improvements in anthropometric and vital metabolic parameters were also observed.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyse Malaysian stakeholders' intentions to adopt nutrigenomics, and determines the factors that influence their intentions.

METHODS: A survey was conducted based on the responses of 421 adults (aged 18 years and older) and comprising two stakeholder groups: healthcare providers (n = 221) and patients (n = 200) who were located in the Klang Valley, Malaysia. The SPSS software was used to analyse the descriptive statistics of intention to adopt nutrigenomics and the SmartPLS software was used to determine the predicting factors affecting their decisions to adopt nutrigenomics.

RESULTS: The results show that the stakeholders perceived the benefits of nutrigenomics as outweighing its risks, suggesting that the perceived benefits represent the most important direct predictor of the intention to adopt nutrigenomics. The perceived risks of nutrigenomics, trust in key players, engagement with medical genetics and religiosity also predict the intention to adopt nutrigenomics. Additionally, the perceived benefits of nutrigenomics served as a mediator for four factors: perceived risks of nutrigenomics, engagement with medical genetics, trust in key players and religiosity, whilst the perceived risks were a mediator for engagement with medical genetics.

METHOD: Antioxidant activities were determined. Phytochemical analysis was performed by gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS). In the in vivo study, Sprague Dawley rats were pretreated with C. nudiflora (150, 300, and 450 mg kg body weight (b.wt.)) once daily for 14 days followed by two doses of CCl4 (1 ml/kg b.wt.). After 2 weeks, the rats were sacrificed and hepatoprotective analysis was performed.

RESULTS: In vitro studies have shown that the extract possessed strong antioxidant activity and has ability to scavenge 2,2-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl-free radicals effectively. GCMS analysis of the C. nudiflora extract revealed the presence of various bioactive compounds. Administration of C. nudiflora significantly reduced the impact of CCl4 toxicity on serum markers of liver damage, serum aspartate transaminase (AST), and alanine transaminase (ALT). C. nudiflora also increased antioxidant levels of hepatic glutathione (GSH) and antioxidant enzymes and ameliorated the elevated hepatic formation of malondialdehyde (MDA) induced by CCl4 in rats. Histopathological examination indicated that C. nudiflora protect the liver from the toxic effect of CCl4 and healed lesions such as necrosis, fatty degeneration, and hepatocyte injury as irregular lamellar organization and dilations in the endoplasmic reticulum. The immunohistochemical studies revealed that pretreatment of C. nudiflora decreased the formation of 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal (HNE)-modified protein adducts and 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG). Furthermore, overexpression of the proinflammatory cytokines TNF-α, IL-6, and prostaglandin E2 is also reduced.

METHODOLOGY: The Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Medline (1966 to April week 1, 2020), Embase (1966 to April week 1, 2020) and trial registries for relevant randomized clinical trials were used. Published and unpublished randomized clinical trials were reviewed and evaluated. Random effects models were used to estimate the continuous outcomes and mean differences (MDs); both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcomes were changes in systolic and diastolic BP. The secondary outcomes were changes in lipid profile, glucose metabolism, inflammatory markers for CVD, kidney and liver functions safety parameters. We assessed the data for risk of bias, heterogeneity, sensitivity, reporting bias and quality of evidence.

RESULTS: Five trials were included involving 325 patients aged 18-80 years. Two trials involved high-income countries and three trials involved moderate-income countries. The analysis performed was based on three comparisons. No significant changes were found between systolic or diastolic blood pressure (BP) for the first comparison, 1,000 mg per day for a combined formulation of olive leaf extract versus a placebo. The second comparison, 500 mg per day of olive leaf extract versus placebo or no treatment, showed a significant reduction in systolic BP over a period of at least 8 weeks of follow up (MD -5.78 mmHg, 95% CI [-10.27 to -1.30]) and no significant changes on diastolic BP. The third comparison, 1,000 mg per day of olive leaf extract versus placebo shows no significant difference but an almost similar reduction in systolic BP (-11.5 mmHg in olive leaf extract and -13.7 mmHg in placebo, MD 2.2 mmHg, 95% CI [-0.43-4.83]) and diastolic BP (-4.8 mmHg in olive leaf extract and -6.4 mmHg in placebo, MD 1.60 mmHg, 95% CI [-0.13-3.33]). For secondary outcomes, 1,000 mg per day of olive leaf extract versus captopril showed a reduction in LDL (MD -6.00 mg/dl, 95% CI [-11.5 to -0.50]). The 500 mg per day olive leaf extract versus placebo showed a reduction in inflammatory markers for CVD IL-6 (MD -6.83 ng/L, 95% CI [-13.15 to -0.51]), IL-8 (MD -8.24 ng/L, 95% CI [-16.00 to -0.48) and TNF-alpha (MD -7.40 ng/L, 95% CI [-13.23 to -1.57]).

CONCLUSIONS: The results from this review suggest the reduction of systolic BP, LDL and inflammatory biomarkers, but it may not provide a robust conclusion regarding the effects of olive leaf extract on cardiometabolic profile due to the limited number of participants in the included trials.

RESULTS: Participants in the RPG and CG reported a statistically significant reduction in knee pain and stiffness (p ≤ 0.05) within the group. The reduction in the scores of knee pain was higher in participants in the RPG than that in participants in the CG (p=0.001). Additionally, participants in the RPG reported greater satisfaction (p=0.001) and higher self-reported exercise adherence (p=0.010) and coordinator-reported exercise adherence (p=0.046) than the participants in the CG.