MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cases of road accident deaths in motorcyclists received by UKM Medical Centre were studied over a period of 10 years, that is, between 2010 and 2019. This study was based on forensic autopsy records database and forensic autopsy.
RESULTS: The most affected age group by road fatalities were young men. The most common injuries were intracranial hemorrhage (74%), thoracic hemorrhage (73%), and lung laceration (85.7%). About 39 (31%) fatally injured riders were positive for illicit drug and/or alcohol.
CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that men in the third decade of life are the major victims of motorcycle fatalities. Hence, urgent measures are necessary to establish road safety policy to reduce such fatalities.
OBJECTIVE: Given the unpopularity of the current hard hat, the general perception of workers concerning its use and its measurements are the determining factors in the development of a new hard hat.
METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted in which 132 male oil palm harvesters between 19 and 60 years of age were selected from among the employees of the same oil palm harvesting company. A set of questionnaires was developed to collect their socio-demographic information as well as their perceptions of comfort and the prevalence of head injury. In addition, a set of measuring instruments, including Martin's anthropometry set, was used for head measurement and data collection in respect of the current hard hat. In this research, six respondents were randomly selected to attend an interview session for qualitative assessment.RESULTSBased on the questionnaires, the unpopularity in the use of the hard hat was largely influenced by factors related to poor design, in general, and, specifically, poor ventilation (64%), load (67% ), and physical discomfort (42% ). The measurements of the anthropometric parameters and the dimensions of the hard hat also showed a significant mismatch.
CONCLUSION: The unpopularity of the current hard hat among oil palm harvesters stemmed from the discomfort from wearing, which showed that the development of a new hard hat could lead to better usage and the greater likelihood of wearing a hard hat throughout the working day.
METHODS: Non-inferiority randomized, clinical trial involving patients presenting with acute respiratory failure conducted in the ED of a local hospital. Participants were randomly allocated to receive either hCPAP or fCPAP as per the trial protocol. The primary endpoint was respiratory rate reduction. Secondary endpoints included discomfort, improvement in Dyspnea and Likert scales, heart rate reduction, arterial blood oxygenation, partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), dryness of mucosa and intubation rate.
RESULTS: 224 patients were included and randomized (113 patients to hCPAP, 111 to fCPAP). Both techniques reduced respiratory rate (hCPAP: from 33.56 ± 3.07 to 25.43 ± 3.11 bpm and fCPAP: from 33.46 ± 3.35 to 27.01 ± 3.19 bpm), heart rate (hCPAP: from 114.76 ± 15.5 to 96.17 ± 16.50 bpm and fCPAP: from 115.07 ± 14.13 to 101.19 ± 16.92 bpm), and improved dyspnea measured by both the Visual Analogue Scale (hCPAP: from 16.36 ± 12.13 to 83.72 ± 12.91 and fCPAP: from 16.01 ± 11.76 to 76.62 ± 13.91) and the Likert scale. Both CPAP techniques improved arterial oxygenation (PaO2 from 67.72 ± 8.06 mmHg to 166.38 ± 30.17 mmHg in hCPAP and 68.99 ± 7.68 mmHg to 184.49 ± 36.38 mmHg in fCPAP) and the PaO2:FiO2 (Partial pressure of arterial oxygen: Fraction of inspired oxygen) ratio from 113.6 ± 13.4 to 273.4 ± 49.5 in hCPAP and 115.0 ± 12.9 to 307.7 ± 60.9 in fCPAP. The intubation rate was lower with hCPAP (4.4% for hCPAP versus 18% for fCPAP, absolute difference -13.6%, p = 0.003). Discomfort and dryness of mucosa were also lower with hCPAP.
CONCLUSION: In patients presenting to the ED with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema or decompensated COPD, hCPAP was non-inferior to fCPAP and resulted in greater comfort levels and lower intubation rate.