Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Urquhart DM, Kelsall HL, Hoe VC, Cicuttini FM, Forbes AB, Sim MR
    Clin J Pain, 2013 Dec;29(12):1015-20.
    PMID: 23370089 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e31827ff0c0
    OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationship between individual and work-related psychosocial factors and low back pain (LBP) and associated time off work in an occupational cohort.
    METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was completed by nurses working across 3 major public hospitals. Participants provided sociodemographic data and information on the occurrence of LBP, time off work, and psychosocial factors.
    RESULTS: One thousand one hundred eleven participants (response rate 38.6%) were included in the study. Fifty-six percent of participants reported LBP in the previous year. When individual psychosocial factors were examined in the same model, the relationship between somatization and LBP persisted (OR 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35, 2.01). Low job security was also significantly associated with LBP independent of the other work-related factors (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69, 0.98). Of those participants with LBP, 30% reported absence from work due to LBP. When absence from work was examined, negative beliefs (OR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94, 1.00) and pain catastrophizing (OR 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.71) were independently associated with time off work, along with low job satisfaction (OR 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51, 0.97) and high job support (OR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.75).
    CONCLUSIONS: Somatization and low job security were found to be independently associated with occupational LBP, whereas negative beliefs, pain catastrophizing, reduced job satisfaction, and high job support were independently related to time off work. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether these individual and work-related psychosocial factors predict, or alternatively, are outcomes of pain and time off work associated with LBP.
  2. Shehabi Y, Forbes AB, Arabi Y, Bass F, Bellomo R, Kadiman S, et al.
    Crit Care Resusc, 2017 Dec;19(4):318-326.
    PMID: 29202258
    BACKGROUND: Sedation strategy in critically ill patients who are mechanically ventilated is influenced by patient-related factors, choice of sedative agent and the intensity or depth of sedation prescribed. The impact of sedation strategy on outcome, in particular when delivered early after initiation of mechanical ventilation, is uncertain.

    OBJECTIVES: To present the protocol and analysis plan of a large randomised clinical trial investigating the effect of a sedation strategy, in critically ill patients who are mechanically ventilated, based on a protocol targeting light sedation using dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative, termed "early goal-directed sedation", compared with usual practice.

    METHODS: This is a multinational randomised clinical trial in adult intensive care patients expected to require mechanical ventilation for longer than 24 hours. The main exclusion criteria include suspected or proven primary brain pathology or having already been intubated or sedated in an intensive care unit for longer than 12 hours. Randomisation occurs via a secured website with baseline stratification by site and suspected or proven sepsis. The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes include death, institutional dependency, cognitive function and health-related quality of life 180 days after randomisation, as well as deliriumfree, coma-free and ventilation-free days at 28 days after randomisation. A predefined subgroup analysis will also be conducted. Analyses will be on an intention-to-treat basis and in accordance with this pre-specified analysis plan.

    CONCLUSION: SPICE III is an ongoing large scale clinical trial. Once completed, it will inform sedation practice in critically ill patients who are ventilated.

  3. Leder K, Openshaw JJ, Allotey P, Ansariadi A, Barker SF, Burge K, et al.
    BMJ Open, 2021 01 08;11(1):e042850.
    PMID: 33419917 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042850
    INTRODUCTION: Increasing urban populations have led to the growth of informal settlements, with contaminated environments linked to poor human health through a range of interlinked pathways. Here, we describe the design and methods for the Revitalising Informal Settlements and their Environments (RISE) study, a transdisciplinary randomised trial evaluating impacts of an intervention to upgrade urban informal settlements in two Asia-Pacific countries.

    METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RISE is a cluster randomised controlled trial among 12 settlements in Makassar, Indonesia, and 12 in Suva, Fiji. Six settlements in each country have been randomised to receive the intervention at the outset; the remainder will serve as controls and be offered intervention delivery after trial completion. The intervention involves a water-sensitive approach, delivering site-specific, modular, decentralised infrastructure primarily aimed at improving health by decreasing exposure to environmental faecal contamination. Consenting households within each informal settlement site have been enrolled, with longitudinal assessment to involve health and well-being surveys, and human and environmental sampling. Primary outcomes will be evaluated in children under 5 years of age and include prevalence and diversity of gastrointestinal pathogens, abundance and diversity of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes in gastrointestinal microorganisms and markers of gastrointestinal inflammation. Diverse secondary outcomes include changes in microbial contamination; abundance and diversity of pathogens and AMR genes in environmental samples; impacts on ecological biodiversity and microclimates; mosquito vector abundance; anthropometric assessments, nutrition markers and systemic inflammation in children; caregiver-reported and self-reported health symptoms and healthcare utilisation; and measures of individual and community psychological, emotional and economic well-being. The study aims to provide proof-of-concept evidence to inform policies on upgrading of informal settlements to improve environments and human health and well-being.

    ETHICS: Study protocols have been approved by ethics boards at Monash University, Fiji National University and Hasanuddin University.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618000633280; Pre-results.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links