METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out using a systematic random sampling method in hypertensive patients who attended two government primary care clinics in Sarawak. The STOP-Bang questionnaire was used to screen for OSA, and social-demographic data was captured with a questionnaire. Multiple logistic regressions were used to examine the determinants of the OSA.
RESULTS: A total of 410 patients were enrolled in this study. The mean age of study population patients was 56.4 years, with more than half being female. The mean blood pressure was 136/82. The prevalence of probable OSA among patients with hypertension was 54.4%. According to multiple logistic regression analyses, smoking (odds ratio [OR] 14.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.335-61.947), retirees (OR 3.20, 95% CI 1.675-6.113), and being Chinese (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.262-3.863) had a significant positive association with probable OSA.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of the high prevalence of probable OSA among patients with hypertension, primary care physicians should be more vigilant in identifying hypertensive patients with OSA risk. Early detection and intervention would reduce disease complications and healthcare costs.
METHODS: Included trials were assessed using Cochrane risk of bias instrument. We performed meta-analysis with random-effects model and random errors were evaluated with TSA. We performed the search for the eligible randomized controlled trial (RCT) through Medline, Cinahl, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and also PubMed.
RESULTS: A total of 370 subjects sourced from seven eligible RCTs were entered into the analysis. The pooled results demonstrated the significant reduction with the use of qigong of the systolic blood pressure [weighted mean difference (WMD), - 10.66 mmHg (95% confidence interval (CI) = - 17.69,-3.62, p
METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Ovid, Scopus and ScienceDirect for observational studies in Asia from inception to August 2017. We selected cross sectional studies reporting the prevalence and risk factors for GDM. A random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of GDM and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: Eighty-four studies with STROBE score ≥ 14 were included in our analysis. The pooled prevalence of GDM in Asia was 11.5% (95% CI 10.9-12.1). There was considerable heterogeneity (I2 > 95%) in the prevalence of GDM in Asia, which is likely due to differences in diagnostic criteria, screening methods and study setting. Meta-analysis demonstrated that the risk factors of GDM include history of previous GDM (OR 8.42, 95% CI 5.35-13.23); macrosomia (OR 4.41, 95% CI 3.09-6.31); and congenital anomalies (OR 4.25, 95% CI 1.52-11.88). Other risk factors include a BMI ≥25 kg/m2 (OR 3.27, 95% CI 2.81-3.80); pregnancy-induced hypertension (OR 3.20, 95% CI 2.19-4.68); family history of diabetes (OR 2.77, 2.22-3.47); history of stillbirth (OR 2.39, 95% CI 1.68-3.40); polycystic ovary syndrome (OR 2.33, 95% CI1.72-3.17); history of abortion (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.54-3.29); age ≥ 25 (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.96-2.41); multiparity ≥2 (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.24-1.52); and history of preterm delivery (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.21-3.07).
CONCLUSION: We found a high prevalence of GDM among the Asian population. Asian women with common risk factors especially among those with history of previous GDM, congenital anomalies or macrosomia should receive additional attention from physician as high-risk cases for GDM in pregnancy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (2017: CRD42017070104 ).
METHODS: A systematic search of relevant cohort studies from three electronic databases to identify all relevant studies published up to 7 November 2022. The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.
RESULTS: A total of 54 articles with 355 787 matched pairs of parturient women and neonates from 30 countries were included in the analysis. The pooled prevalence of GBS colonisation was 17.1% among the pregnant women and 1.0% among neonates. The pooled prevalence of vertical transmission of GBS was 4.5% and the pooled relative risk of GBS colonisation of neonates born to mothers with GBS was 9.9.
CONCLUSION: We support the implementation of targeted intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for all women who are positive for GBS as well as women with risks factors for early onset GBS in their infants regardless of their GBS colonisation status.
METHODS: This was a prospective, international, multicenter cohort study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the Asia-Pacific. Arrests caused by trauma, patients who were not transported by emergency medical services (EMS), and pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases (<18 years) were excluded from the analysis. Modifiable out-of-hospital factors (bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR] and defibrillation, out-of-hospital defibrillation, advanced airway, and drug administration) were compared for all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients presenting to EMS and participating hospitals. The primary outcome measure was survival to hospital discharge or 30 days of hospitalization (if not discharged). We used multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression models to identify factors independently associated with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival, accounting for clustering within each community.
RESULTS: Of 66,780 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases reported between January 2009 and December 2012, we included 56,765 in the analysis. In the adjusted model, modifiable factors associated with improved out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes included bystander CPR (odds ratio [OR] 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31 to 1.55), response time less than or equal to 8 minutes (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.35 to 1.71), and out-of-hospital defibrillation (OR 2.31; 95% CI 1.96 to 2.72). Out-of-hospital advanced airway (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.80) was negatively associated with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival.
CONCLUSION: In the PAROS cohort, bystander CPR, out-of-hospital defibrillation, and response time less than or equal to 8 minutes were positively associated with increased out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival, whereas out-of-hospital advanced airway was associated with decreased out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival. Developing EMS systems should focus on basic life support interventions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation.
METHOD: This online-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 1280 healthcare providers aged ≥18 years from 30 primary care clinics in the state of Selangor, Malaysia. The Fear of COVID-19 Scale was used to assess the level of fear, and the results were analysed using multiple linear regression.
RESULTS: The mean age of the respondents was 36 years, and the mean working experience was 11 years. The majority of the respondents were women (82.4%) and Malays (82.3%). The factors that were significantly correlated with higher levels of fear were underlying chronic disease (ß=1.12, P=0.002, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.08, 3.15), concern about mortality from COVID-19 (ß=3.3, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.19, 7.22), higher risk of exposure (ß=0.8, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.14, 5.91), concern for self at work (ß=2.8, P=0.002, 95% CI=0.08, 3.10) and work as a nurse (ß=3.6, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.30, 7.52), medical laboratory worker (ß=3.0, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.12, 4.27) and healthcare assistant (ß=3.9, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.17, 5.73). The level of fear was inversely correlated with a higher work-related stress management score (ß=-0.9, P<0.001, 95% CI=-0.14, -5.07) and a higher sleep quality score (ß=-1.8, P<0.001, 95% CI=-0.28, -10.41).
CONCLUSION: Family physicians should be vigilant and identify healthcare providers at risk of developing COVID-19-related fear to initiate early mental health intervention.
OBJECTIVE: This study was to determine the prevalence and factors associated with anti-NMDAR encephalitis among affected patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The protocol of this study has been registered (2019: CRD42019142002) with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The primary outcome was the incidence or prevalence of anti-NMDAR encephalitis and secondary outcomes were factors associated with anti-NMDAR encephalitis.
RESULTS: There were 11 studies and a total of 873 million patients taken from high-risk populations across 11 countries that were included in the primary analysis. The overall pooled prevalence of anti-NMDAR encephalitis among patients with medical conditions was 7.0% (95% CI = 4.4, 9.6). Those with first episode of psychosis or schizophrenia were at a higher risk of developing anti-NMDAR encephalitis with an odds ratio of 5.976 (95% CI = 1.122, 31.825).
CONCLUSION: We found that almost one-tenth of patients with medical conditions had anti-NMDAR encephalitis; particularly those with first episode of psychosis or schizophrenia were among the high-risk medical conditions.
METHODS: This is a systematic review protocol describing essential reporting items based on the PRISMA for systematic review protocols (PRISMA-P) (Registration number: CRD42020220636). We aim to review the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of hf-rTMS at DLPFC in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as migraine prophylactic treatment. We will search Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Biomed Central for relevant articles from randomised controlled clinical trials that used hf-rTMS applied at DLPFC for the treatment of migraine. The risk of bias will be assessed using the version 2 "Risk of bias" tool from Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.1. We will investigate the evidence on efficacy, tolerability and safety and we will compare the outcomes between the hf-rTMS intervention and sham groups.
DISCUSSION: This systematic review will further determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of hf-rTMS applied at DLPFC for migraine prophylaxis. It will provide additional data for health practitioners and policymakers about the usefulness of hf-rTMS for migraine preventive treatment.