METHODS: The association between the WCRF/AICR score (score range 0-6 in men and 0-7 in women; higher scores indicate greater concordance) assessed on average 6.4 years before diagnosis and CRC-specific (n = 872) and overall mortality (n = 1,113) was prospectively examined among 3,292 participants diagnosed with CRC in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort (mean follow-up time after diagnosis 4.2 years). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mortality.
RESULTS: The HRs (95% CIs) for CRC-specific mortality among participants in the second (score range in men/women: 2.25-2.75/3.25-3.75), third (3-3.75/4-4.75), and fourth (4-6/5-7) categories of the score were 0.87 (0.72-1.06), 0.74 (0.61-0.90), and 0.70 (0.56-0.89), respectively (P for trend <0.0001), compared to participants with the lowest concordance with the recommendations (category 1 of the score: 0-2/0-3). Similar HRs for overall mortality were observed (P for trend 0.004). Meeting the recommendations on body fatness and plant food consumption were associated with improved survival among CRC cases in mutually adjusted models.
CONCLUSIONS: Greater concordance with the WCRF/AICR recommendations on diet, physical activity, and body fatness prior to CRC diagnosis is associated with improved survival among CRC patients.
METHODS: A online cross-sectional survey was conducted with the people living in Wuhan between March 12th and 23rd, 2020.
RESULTS: Of a total of 2411 complete responses, the mean and standard deviation for the total physical prevention barriers score was 19.73 (standard deviation ± 5.3; range 12-45) out of a possible score of 48. Using a cut-off score of 44 for the State-Trait Inventory score, 79.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.2-81.5) of the participants reported moderate to severe anxiety during the early phase of the outbreak, and 51.3% (95% CI 49.2-53.3) reported moderate to severe anxiety after the peak of coronavirus disease 2019 was over (during the study period). Comparing anxiety levels in the early phase of the outbreak and after the peak of the outbreak, 58.5% (95% CI 56.5-60.5) recorded a decreased anxiety. Females reported a higher likelihood of having decreased levels of anxiety than males (odds ratio = 1.78, 95% CI 1.48-2.14). Low negative attitudes score were associated with a higher decrease in anxiety (odds ratio = 1.59, 95% CI 1.33-1.89).
CONCLUSIONS: The attitudinal barriers to prevention of transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 are more prominent than physical prevention barriers after the peak of coronavirus disease 2019. High anxiety levels even after the peak warrant serious attention.
METHODS: Adults were selected through a stratified, two-stage cluster community sample in Selangor, Malaysia. The reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the measurement model were assessed before implementing a partial least squares structural equation model (PLS-SEM) to evaluate the significance of the structural paths.
RESULTS: A total of 728 participants were enrolled. The five constructs all showed adequate internal reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. There was a significant, positive relationship to WTP from constructs (perceived barriers [Path coefficient (β) = 0.082, P = 0.036], perceived susceptibility [β = 0.214, P<0.001], and cues to action [β = 0.166, P<0.001]), and the model all together accounted for 8.8% of the variation in WTP. There was a significant, negative relationship between perceived barriers and perceived benefit [β = -0.261, P<0.001], which accounted for 6.8% of variation in perceived benefit.
CONCLUSIONS: Policy and programs should be targeted that can modify individuals' thoughts about disease risk, their obstacles in obtaining the preventive action, and their readiness to obtain a vaccine. Such programs include educational materials about disease risk and clinic visits that can pair HepB screening and vaccination.
METHODS: A total of 613 patients were recruited for the study from the dental clinic at the Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Saudi Arabia. The data collection was done in three parts from the patients who visited the hospital to receive dental treatment. The first part included the socio-demographic characteristics of the patients and the COVID-19 swab tests performed within the past 14 days. The second part was the clinical examination, and the third part was a confirmation of the swab test taken by the patient by checking the Hesen website using the patient ID. After data collection, statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS 26.0. Descriptive analysis was done and expressed as mean, standard deviation, frequency, and percentage (%). A cross-tabulation, also described as a contingency table, was used to identify trends and patterns across data and explain the correlation between different variables.
RESULTS: It was seen from the status of the swab test within 14 days of the patient's arrival at the hospital for the dental treatment that 18 (2.9%) patients lied about the pre-treatment swab test within 14 days, and 595 (97.1%) were truthful. The observed and expected counts showed across genders and diagnosis a statistically significant difference (p patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Dental healthcare workers are worried and assume a high risk of COVID-19 infection as the patients are not truthful about the pre-treatment COVID-19 swab test. Routine rapid tests on patients and the healthcare staff are a feasible option for lowering overall risks.
DESIGN: An accessor-blinded randomised controlled trial was carried out at the outpatient surgical clinic of a tertiary hospital. Patients were randomly assigned to the control group (received standard written and verbal instructions) or the experimental group (received an intensive and structured educational programme). All subjects completed a questionnaire before colonoscopy to assess their compliance, acceptability, and tolerability towards bowel preparation regime. Quality of bowel preparation was determined using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).
RESULTS: A total of 300 subjects who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recruited. The experimental group had a significantly higher proportion of good quality bowel preparation than the control group (98.7% vs 52.3%, p<0.001). The median total BBPS score was also significantly higher in the experimental group (8 vs 5, p<0.001). Factors associated with good quality of bowel preparation included educational programme (OR: 22.79, 95% CI: 4.23 to 122.85, p<0.001), compliance to bowel cleansing agent (OR: 24.98, 95% CI 3.12 to 199.71, p<0.001), very difficult acceptability of preparation (OR: 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38, p<0.001), tolerability towards bowel preparation (OR: 4.98, 95% CI 1.44 to 17.20, p<0.011) and hypomotility drugs (OR: 3.03, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.91, p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: An intensive patient educational programme can significantly improve the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.