METHODS: Two focus group discussions, involving 5 participants each for Chinese and Indian groups, were conducted separately. Participant's personal information was collected anonymously. The discussion covered 5 areas: determinants for taking medications; reason for choosing alternative medications rather than hormone replacement therapy (HRT); how these medications help them; their view on cost-effectiveness and concerns over long-term use. The discussions were audio-taped, transcribed and analyzed.
RESULTS: Chinese participants took supplements for controlling symptoms while Indian participants used herbs as a preventive measure during menopause according to their tradition. Women of both groups mentioned that they did not take HRT because of fear of side effects. Chinese group mentioned that medications remarkably improved their symptoms whereas Indian participants appreciated their herbals more for improvement in general wellbeing than for specific symptoms. All members agreed that using alternative medication was cost-effective. Both Chinese and Indian participants were quite confident in saying that long-term use will not be associated with any side effects. However, Indian group emphasized that proper preparation of herbal compound using different types of leaves, is essential in order to avoid untoward effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Chinese and Indian women used alternative medicine in prevention and treatment of menopause-related problems even as they were avoiding HRT because of the fear of side effects. They believed that their supplements were effective, safe and cost-beneficial even with long-term use.
DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from March to April 2020 among adults, 18 years old and above, who reside in Myanmar through a structured questionnaire distributed in social media platforms. Univariate and Bivariate analyses were used to estimate the prevalence of COVID-19 Peritraumatic Distress Index (CPDI) symptoms and to test the associations between CPDI and the exposure variables. Logistic Regression Analysis was done to identify significant predictors of distress.
RESULTS: There were 530 participants in this study.37.4% of them did not have psychological distress,55.6% experienced mild to moderate psychological distress, and 7% experienced severe psychological distress due to COVID-19 pandemic. Simple and Multiple Logistic Regression Analyses were performed to determine the factors associated with psychological distress due to COVID-19.
CONCLUSIONS: It was shown that the self-employed group and age group older than 45 years old had more psychological distress than others. However, Buddhists and people from the capital city had less distress than other religions and districts. This study recommends the government to develop better strategies for self-employed groups, elders, and the poor for a support, relief, and resettlement of their ruined status.