OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the quality of life (QOL) scores among breast cancer patients at a Malaysian public hospital.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study of breast cancer patients was conducted between March to June 2013. QOL scores were determined using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and its breast cancer supplementary measure (QLQ-BR23). Both the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 assess items from functional and symptom scales. The QLQ-C30 in addition also measures the Global Health Status (GHS). Systematic random sampling was used to recruit patients.
RESULTS: 223 breast cancer patients were recruited with a response rate of 92.1%. The mean age of the patients was 52.4 years (95% CI = 51.0, 53.7, SD=10.3). Majority of respondents are Malays (60.5%), followed by Chinese (19.3%), Indians (18.4%), and others (1.8%). More than 50% of respondents are at stage III and stage IV of malignancy. The mean Global Health Status was 65.7 (SD = 21.4). From the QLQ-C30, the mean score in the functioning scale was highest for 'cognitive functioning' (84.1, SD=18.0), while the mean score in the symptom scale was highest for 'financial difficulties' (40.1, SD=31.6). From the QLQ-BR23, the mean score for functioning scale was highest for 'body image' (80.0, SD=24.6) while the mean score in the symptom scale was highest for 'upset by hair loss' (36.2, SD=29.4). Two significant predictors for Global Health Status were age and employment. The predictors explained 10.6% of the variation of global health status (R2=0.106).
CONCLUSIONS: Age and employment were found to be significant predictors for Global Health Status (GHS). The Quality of Life among breast cancer patients reflected by the GHS improves as age and employment increases.
METHODS: A total of 138 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I to III patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups and underwent baseline laryngoscopy in the sniffing position. Group BUHE patients (n = 69) were then intubated in the BUHE position, while group GLSC patients (n = 69) were intubated using GLSC laryngoscopy. Laryngeal exposure was measured using Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) score and Cormack-Lehane (CL) grading, and noninferiority will be declared if the difference in mean POGO scores between both groups do not exceed -15% at the lower limit of a 98% confidence interval (CI). Secondary outcomes measured included time required for intubation (TRI), number of intubation attempts, use of airway adjuncts, effort during laryngoscopy, and complications during intubation.
RESULTS: Mean POGO score in group BUHE was 80.14% ± 22.03%, while in group GLSC it was 86.45% ± 18.83%, with a mean difference of -6.3% (98% CI, -13.2% to 0.6%). In both groups, there was a significant improvement in mean POGO scores when compared to baseline laryngoscopy in the sniffing position (group BUHE, 25.8% ± 4.7%; group GLSC, 30.7% ± 6.8%) (P < .0001). The mean TRI was 36.23 ± 14.41 seconds in group BUHE, while group GLSC had a mean TRI of 44.33 ± 11.53 seconds (P < .0001). In patients with baseline CL 3 grading, there was no significant difference between mean POGO scores in both groups (group BUHE, 49.2% ± 19.6% versus group GLSC, 70.5% ± 29.7%; P = .054).
CONCLUSIONS: In the general population, BUHE intubation position provides a noninferior laryngeal view to GLSC intubation. The laryngeal views obtained in both approaches were superior to the laryngeal view obtained in the sniffing position. In view of the many advantages of the BUHE position for intubation, the lack of proven adverse effects, the simplicity, and the cost-effectiveness, we propose that clinicians should consider the BUHE position as the standard intubation position for the general population.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of social media as an educational medium to effectively translate emerging research evidence into clinical practice.
METHODS: The study used a mixed-methods approach. Evidence-based practice points were delivered via social media platforms. The primary outcomes of attitude, knowledge, and behavior change were assessed using a preintervention/postintervention evaluation, with qualitative data gathered to contextualize the findings.
RESULTS: Data were obtained from 317 clinicians from multiple health disciplines, predominantly from the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, India, and Malaysia. The participants reported an overall improvement in attitudes toward social media for professional development (P
Methods: This open label comparative design study randomized health professional clinicians to receive "practice points" on tendinopathy management via Twitter or Facebook. Evaluated outcomes included knowledge change and self-reported changes to clinical practice.
Results: Four hundred and ninety-four participants were randomized to 1 of 2 groups and 317 responders analyzed. Both groups demonstrated improvements in knowledge and reported changes to clinical practice. There was no statistical difference between groups for the outcomes of knowledge change (P = .728), changes to clinical practice (P = .11) or the increased use of research information (P = .89). Practice points were shared more by the Twitter group (P