METHODS: Patients with primary breast and colorectal cancer undergoing elective surgery are recruited from two tertiary hospitals. Eligible patients are assigned into one of the three intervention arms: (i) Group SS will receive ONS in addition to their normal diet up to 14 days preoperatively and postoperatively up to discharge; (ii) Group SS-E will receive ONS in addition to their normal diet up to 14 days preoperatively, postoperatively up to discharge and for an extended 90 days after discharge; and (iii) Group DS will receive ONS in addition to their normal diet postoperatively up to discharge from the hospital. The ONS is a standard formula fortified with lactium to aid in sleep for recovery. The primary endpoints include changes in weight, body mass index (BMI), serum albumin and prealbumin levels, while secondary endpoints are body composition (muscle and fat mass), muscle strength (handgrip strength), energy and protein intake, sleep quality, haemoglobin, inflammatory markers (transferrin, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6), stress marker (saliva cortisol), length of hospital stay and postoperative complication rate.
DISCUSSION: This trial is expected to provide evidence on whether perioperative supplementation in breast and colorectal cancer patients presenting with high BMI and not severely malnourished but undergoing the stress of surgery would be beneficial in terms of nutritional and clinical outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov NCT04400552. Registered on 22 May 2020, retrospectively registered.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with, one hundred and forty individuals with paraplegic SCI, who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and attended an outpatient rehabilitation clinic. The impairment of body function/structures of participants was assessed using the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Scale, which classified them as A, B, C, D, or E. A set of questionnaire survey forms was used to collect sociodemographic information, occupational participation, environmental factors, and QOL by using a demographic questionnaire, World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS-II), Craig Hospital Inventory of Environmental Factors (CHIEF) scale and World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL) BREF form respectively.
RESULTS: The results showed that occupational participation was the strongest predictor of QOL among persons with paraplegic SCI (β=-0.586, p<0.001). In the second step, variables representing body function/structure factors (ASIA-A, B, C, D, E) were added, and the overall model explained 40.7% of the variance in QOL. In the third step, personal factors (age groups, gender, marital status, level of education, and rehabilitation duration) were added, and the overall model explained 51.4% of the variance in QOL. In the final step, environmental factors (CHIEF 12 Items scale) were added, but they did not significantly explain the model.
CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that occupational participation was found to be the most significant predictor of QOL among individuals with paraplegic SCI. Body function/structure factors, personal factors, and environmental factors were also significant predictors, but to a lesser extent. The findings of this study can inform healthcare professionals and policymakers in developing interventions and, policies targeting occupational participation, and personal factors that may be effective to improve the QOL of individuals with paraplegic SCI in Pakistan.
METHODS: All 132 EDs were requested for a copy of written discharge instruction given to the patients. The mTBI discharge instructions were evaluated using the Patient Education Materials Assessment-Printable Tool (PEMAT-P) for understandability and actionability. Readability was measured using an online readability tool of Malay text. The content was compared against the discharge instructions recommended by established guidelines.
RESULTS: 49 articles were eligible for the study. 26 of the articles met the criteria of understandability, and 3 met the criteria for actionability. The average readability level met the ability of average adult. Most of the discharge instructions focused on emergency symptoms, and none contained post-concussion features.
CONCLUSION: Majority of the discharge instructions provided were appropriate for average people to read but difficult to understand and act upon. Important information was neglected in most discharge instructions. Thus, revision and future development of mTBI discharge instruction should consider health literacy demand and cognitive ability to process such information.
CASE REPORT: Here, we present a case of a young man who has childhood asthma with the last attack more than 10 years ago presented with symptoms suggestive of acute exacerbation of bronchial asthma. As the symptoms failed to improve after standard asthma management, anaphylaxis was suspected, and he was given intramuscular adrenaline 0.5 mg which leads to symptom improvement. However, he developed another attack shortly after improvement while under observation.
CONCLUSION: The objective of this case report is to emphasise the importance of keeping anaphylaxis in mind whenever a patient has treatment-refractory asthma, and also the anticipation of biphasic reaction that warrants adequate observation period especially those who are likely to have developed it.
Objective: The objective of this study was to develop interventions to reduce percentage of patients with one or more medication errors during discharge.
Methods: A pharmacist-led quality improvement (QI) program over 6 months was conducted in medical wards at a tertiary public hospital. Percentage of patients discharge with one or more medication errors was reviewed in the pre-intervention and four main improvements were developed: increase the ratio of pharmacist to patient, prioritize discharge prescription order within office hours, complete discharge medication reconciliation by ward pharmacist, set up a Centralized Discharge Medication Pre-packing Unit. Percentage of patients with one or more medication errors in both pre- and post-intervention phase were monitored using process control chart.
Results: With the implementation of the QI program, the percentage of patients with one or more medication errors during discharge that were corrected by pharmacists significantly increased from 77.6% to 95.9% (p<0.001). Percentage of patients with one or more clinically significant error was similar in both pre and post-QI with an average of 24.8%.
Conclusions: Increasing ratio of pharmacist to patient to complete discharge medication reconciliation during discharge significantly recorded a reduction in the percentage of patients with one or more medication errors.