MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted from July 2020 till August 2021 in a regional state hospital, north of Malaysia. All patients requiring hospitalization for COVID-19 were approached within the first 2 weeks after admission to administer the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale - 21 Items (DASS-21) scale. Follow-up phone calls were made within 3 months of discharged to enquire about the DASS-21 items as well as the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) scale items. Participants above the age of 18 and technology savvy to answer an online questionnaire were recruited for the study. We excluded participants with a known history of psychotic disorder from the study. We utilised the DASS-21 to screen for depression, anxiety, and stress, as well as the IES-R to identify symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Participants could answer the questionnaires in either English or Bahasa Malaysia. For comparison of two categorical data, a chi-square was applied. A univariate analysis was first conducted and all variables with a p ≤0.3 was then entered into the multivariate analysis for the final output. Other than the univariate analysis, all other p values <0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. All data collected were tabulated and analysed in the SPSS v21.0 system.
RESULTS: A total of 306 out of 696 COVID-19 patients responded. The mean age for the participants was 31.69 (SD:11.19) years old. From the total, 54.2% were ladies, 78.8% were Malay, 50.7% were unmarried, 55.2% had higher education, and 67.6% were employed at the time of the survey. We found 20.5% of the participants were depressed, 38.9% had moderate anxiety, and 17.3% were stressed. From the total, 31.7% of the participants were deemed to have had some symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) ranging from mild to severe. From the final multivariate analysis, it was found that depression (p=0.02) had a 2.78 times likeliness of having PTSD, anxiety (p<0.001) had a 3.35 times likeliness of having PTSD and stressed patients (p=0.02) 2.86 times likeliness of having PTSD when compared to those without PTSD.
CONCLUSION: Patients reported to suffer from symptoms of PTSD and might benefit from psychological interventions to mitigate the impact in the long run.
METHODS: Data were collected from an East (Bintulu) and a West (Ipoh) Malaysian hospital medical records in 2015-2021 and 2018-2021, respectively. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the association of aspects such as socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, paraquat ban with the types of pesticides involved (paraquat versus non-paraquat versus unknown) ,and the outcomes (fatal versus non-fatal).
RESULTS: From the study sample of 212 pesticide poisoning patients aged 15 years or above, the majority were self-poisoning cases (75.5%) with a disproportionate over-representation of Indian ethnic minority (44.8%). Most pesticide poisoning cases had socio-environmental stressors (62.30%). The commonest stressors were domestic interpersonal conflicts (61.36%). 42.15% of pesticide poisoning survivors had a psychiatric diagnosis. Paraquat poisoning accounted for 31.6% of all patients and 66.7% of fatalities. Case fatality was positively associated with male gender, current suicidal intent, and paraquat poisoning. After the paraquat ban, the proportion of pesticide poisoning cases using paraquat decreased from 35.8 to 24.0%, and the overall case-fatality dropped slightly from 21.2 to 17.3%.
CONCLUSIONS: Socio-environmental stressors in specific domestic interpersonal conflicts, seemed more prominent in pesticide poisoning compared to psychiatric diagnosis. Paraquat accounted for the majority of pesticide-associated deaths occurring in hospitals in the study areas. There was preliminary evidence that the 2020 paraquat ban led to a fall in case fatality from pesticide poisoning.
METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study, patients received flexible doses of Vortioxetine for a period of six months. All participants were assessed at baseline and scheduled for monitoring at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. Depression severity was assessed using Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale. The Perceived Deficiency Questionnaire (PDQ-5) assessed the perceived cognitive difficulties in concentration, executive functioning, and memory. The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC) was used to assess the patients' quality of life. Side effects of vortioxetine were monitored using the Antidepressant Side-Effect Checklist (ASEC).
RESULTS: Patients experienced a reduction in MADRS scores from 29.89 ± 5.997 at baseline to 11.59 ± 4.629 by Week 24. The PDQ-5 scores showed significant change from Week-4, whereas the EORTC role, emotional, and cognitive functioning scores showed a significant change from Week 2 onwards. CGI-Severity scores decreased from a baseline of 4.39 ± 0.746 to 2.41 ± 1.085 by Week 24. During the 24-Weeks of therapy, around three-quarters of the patients (73.3%) had one or more adverse events reported on the ASEC. The most frequently reported TEAEs were dry mouth, insomnia, somnolence, and headache, with more than a 30% incidence rate.
CONCLUSION: Vortioxetine seems promising in the management of depression and enhancement of cognitive function and quality of life of cancer patients with Major Depressive Disorder.
.