Objective: To provide an update on the current understanding, evaluation, and management of penile warts.
Methods: A PubMed search was completed in Clinical Queries using the key terms 'penile warts' and 'genital warts'. The search strategy included meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, observational studies, and reviews.
Results: Penile warts are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV), notably HPV-6 and HPV-11. Penile warts typically present as asymptomatic papules or plaques. Lesions may be filiform, exophytic, papillomatous, verrucous, hyperkeratotic, cerebriform, fungating, or cauliflower-like. Approximately one-third of penile warts regress without treatment and the average duration prior to resolution is approximately 9 months. Active treatment is preferable to watchful observation to speed up clearance of the lesions and to assuage fears of transmission and autoinoculation. Patient-administered therapies include podofilox (0.5%) solution or gel, imiquimod 3.75 or 5% cream, and sinecatechins (polypheron E) 15% ointment. Clinician-administered therapies include podophyllin, cryotherapy, bichloroacetic or trichloroacetic acid, oral cimetidine, surgical excision, electrocautery, and carbon dioxide laser therapy. Patients who do not respond to first-line treatments may respond to other therapies or a combination of treatment modalities. Second-line therapies include topical/intralesional/intravenous cidofovir, topical 5-fluorouracil, and topical ingenol mebutate.
Conclusion: No single treatment has been shown to be consistently superior to other treatment modalities. The choice of the treatment method should depend on the physician's comfort level with the various treatment options, the patient's preference and tolerability of treatment, and the number and severity of lesions. The comparative efficacy, ease of administration, adverse effects, cost, and availability of the treatment modality should also be taken into consideration.
METHODS: Using qualitative study method, a phone interview was conducted with 16 patients to elicit their views on the reasons for failure to attend the colonoscopy procedure following a positive stool test. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and translated before proceeded with the data analysis. Content analysis was made on the translated interview, followed by systematic classification of data by major themes.
RESULTS: Reasons for nonattendance were categorized under five main themes; unnecessary test, fear of the procedure, logistic obstacles (subthemes; time constraint, transportation problem), social influences, and having other health priority. Lacking in information about the procedure during the referral process was identified to cause misperception and unnecessary worry towards colonoscopy. Fear of the procedure was commonly cited by female respondents while logistic issues pertaining to time constraint were raised by working respondents.
CONCLUSIONS: More effective communication between patients and health care providers are warranted to avoid misconception regarding colonoscopy procedure. Support from primary care doctors, customer-friendly appointment system, use of educational aids and better involvement from family members were among the strategies to increase colonoscopy compliance.
Materials and Methods: A total of 400 south Indian children in the age group of 6-12 years who had visited Dental College and Hospital were recruited in the study. Dental anxiety was measured before dental treatment using MDAS. Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Results: Of the 400 children, 240 (61.5%) had severe dental anxiety, 92 (23%) had mild anxiety, and 78 (17%) had no anxiety. Females had higher anxiety level compared to males. Many study subjects answered that local anesthesia (LA) injection was considered most fearful. Dental anxiety was highest in smaller age groups.
Conclusion: In our research, high percentage of children had dental anxiety, so counseling before dental visits is very important to reduce the dental anxiety among these 6- to 12-year-old children.
METHODS: Participants were invited to an online cross-sectional survey from Aug-Sep 2020. The study assessed psychological distress using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, level of fear using the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, and coping strategies using the Brief Resilient Coping Scale. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to adjust for potential confounders.
RESULTS: The mean age (±SD) of the participants (N = 720) was 31.7 (±11.5) years, and most of them were females (67.1%). Half of the participants had an income source, while 216 (30%) identified themselves as frontline health or essential service workers. People whose financial situation was impacted due to COVID-19 (AOR 2.16, 95% CIs 1.54-3.03), people who drank alcohol in the last four weeks (3.43, 1.45-8.10), people who were a patient (2.02, 1.39-2.93), and had higher levels of fear of COVID-19 (2.55, 1.70-3.80) were more likely to have higher levels of psychological distress. Participants who self-isolated due to exposure to COVID-19 (3.12, 1.04-9.32) and who had moderate to very high levels of psychological distress (2.56, 1.71-3.83) had higher levels of fear. Participants who provided care to a family member/patient with a suspected case of COVID-19 were more likely to be moderately to highly resilient compared to those who did not.
CONCLUSION: Vulnerable groups of individuals such as patients and those impacted financially during COVID-19 should be supported for their mental wellbeing. Behavioural interventions should be targeted to reduce the impact of alcohol drinking during such crisis period.
Methods: Original English questionnaire of IDAF-4C was translated into Urdu language by a panel of dentists and language experts (Urdu and English) followed by critical evaluation, modification and back translation into English language. A final Urdu questionnaire was distributed among 250 patients visiting the Endodontics section at Margalla Institute of Health Sciences (MIHS), Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine the reliability of the Index whereas validity was assessed by exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Mean rank scores of IDAF-4C for male and female participants were evaluated using Mann-Whitney U tests (P < 0.05).
Results: Of 250 questionnaires, 209 were returned with a response rate of 84%. Cronbach's alpha for the Urdu version of IDAF-4C was 0.88. Exploratory factor analysis of the IDAF-4C revealed one factor explaining 55.55% of the common variance (Eigenvalue = 4.5). The mean rank scores of all eight items of IDAF-4C were greater for female participants as compared to male participants with a statistically significant association (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: The psychometric analysis of the Urdu version of IDAF-4C showed good reliability and consistency compared to the original version as well as other translated versions.
DATA DESCRIPTION: Data were collected from 1583 (Mage = 32.22, SD = 12.90, Range = 19-82) respondents from Japan, China, the United States, and Malaysia between October to November 2020. We collected data across age and sex, marital status, number of children, and occupations. We also accounted for stay-at-home measures, change in income, COVID-19 infection status, place of residence, and subjective social status in the study. Our variables included mental health-related and resilience constructs, namely (i) fear of COVID-19, (ii) depression, anxiety, and stress; (iii) present, past, and future life satisfaction, (iv) sense of control, (v) positive emotions, (vi) ego-resilience, (vii) grit, (viii) self-compassion, (ix) passion, and (x) relational mobility. All questionnaires were assessed for their suitability across the four countries with the necessary translation checks. Results from this study can be instrumental in examining the impact of multiple resilience factors and their interaction with demographic variables in shaping mental health outcomes.