MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of men aged above 40 years with no history of prostate cancer, prostate surgery, or 5α-reductase inhibitor treatment. Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and total PV were measured in each subject. Potential sociodemographic and clinical variables including age, weight, comorbidities, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) were collected. Of 1034 subjects, 837 were used in building the PV calculator using regression analysis. The remaining 1/5 (n = 197) was used for model validation.
RESULTS: There were 1034 multiethnic Asian men (Chinese 52.9%, Malay 35.4%, and Indian 11.7%) with mean age of 60 ± 7.6 years. Average PV was 29.4 ± 13.0 mL while the overall mean of PSA was 1.7 ± 1.7 ng/mL. We identified age, IPSS, weight, and PSA (all P
METHODS: A 40-question anonymous online questionnaire was distributed to anesthesiologists and anesthesia trainees in six countries in the Asia-Pacific (Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, India and South Korea). Participants were polled about their current practices in patient warming and temperature measurement across the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative periods. Questions were also asked regarding various individual and environmental barriers to compliance.
RESULTS: In total, 1154 valid survey responses were obtained and analyzed. 279 (24.2%) of respondents prewarm, 508 (44.0%) perform intraoperative active warming, and 486 (42.1%) perform postoperative active warming in the majority of patients. Additionally, 531 (46.0%) measure temperature preoperatively, 767 (67.5%) measure temperature intraoperatively during general anesthesia, and 953 (82.6%) measure temperature postoperatively in the majority of patients. The availability of active warming devices in the operating room (p
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out in Malaysia to assess the knowledge, perception and attitudes of the women in Malaysia. The study was conducted using an online questionnaire, and samples were obtained using convenience sampling. The questionnaire was distributed trilingual in English, Bahasa Malaysia and Chinese. The data was collected with content validated questionnaire. Data was analyzed with descriptive statistics and General Linear Model analysis in SPSS (Version 27).
RESULTS: A total of 201 respondents' data were analyzed. From our study we were able to summarize that the women in Malaysia have a suboptimal knowledge towards personalized risk-stratified breast cancer screening as only 48.9% aware of the term for personalized risk-stratified breast cancer screening. Meanwhile, the majority of the respondents (96.7%) showed positive attitudes towards the importance of risk assessment and screening. Experience of participating in health education programmes about breast cancer and personalized risk-stratified screening was found to be significantly associated with knowledge, attitude and perception towards personalized risk-stratified breast cancer screening.
CONCLUSION: General population's awareness of individualized risk-stratified breast cancer screening was insufficient despite their favourable attitude towards the disease. A multimodal strategy may be used to improve women's knowledge, attitude, and perception of individualized risk-stratified breast cancer screening.
Methods: Twenty-five postmortem cases were scanned with the Philips Brilliance CT-64 and then underwent traditional autopsy. The images were interpreted by two blinded forensic pathologists assisted by a radiologist with the INFOPSY® Digital Autopsy Software System which provides three-dimensional images in Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine format. Diagnostic validity of virtual autopsy (accuracy rate, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values) and concordance between the two forensic pathologists (kappa intraobserver coefficients) were determined.
Results: The causes of death at traditional autopsies were hemorrhage due to traumatic injuries (n = 8), respiratory failure (5), asphyxia due to drowning (4), asphyxia due to hanging or strangulation (2), heart failure (2), nontraumatic hemorrhage (1), and severe burns (1). In two cases, the cause of death could not be ascertained. In 15/23 (65%) cases, the cause of death diagnosed after virtual autopsy matched the diagnosis reported after traditional autopsy. In 8/23 cases (35%), traditional autopsy was necessary to establish the cause of death. Digital data provided relevant information for inferring both cause and manner of death in nine traumatic cases. The validity of virtual autopsy as a diagnostic tool was higher for traumatic deaths than other causes of death (accuracy 84%, sensitivity 82%, and specificity 86%). The concordance between the two forensic pathologists was almost perfect (>0.80).
Conclusions: Our experience supports the use of virtual autopsy in postmortem investigations as an alternative diagnostic practice and does suggest a potential role as a screening test among traumatic deaths.