Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Lee PY, Cheong AT, Ghazali SS, Rashid AA, Ong SC, Ong SY, et al.
    Health Expect, 2022 Dec;25(6):2837-2850.
    PMID: 36098241 DOI: 10.1111/hex.13590
    BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making has been shown to improve the quality of life in metastatic breast cancer patients in high-literacy and high-resource settings. However, limited studies have examined the cultural preferences of metastatic breast cancer patients with shared decision-making implementation and the barriers encountered in an Asian setting where societal norms predominate and physician decision-making is at the forefront. This paper aims to identify (1) barriers to practising shared decision-making faced by healthcare professionals and patients and (2) strategies for implementing shared decision-making in the context of metastatic breast cancer management in Malaysia.

    METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study involving 12 patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer, 16 healthcare professionals and 5 policymakers from surgical and oncology departments at public healthcare centres in Malaysia. Semi-structured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the thematic approach. Nvivo software was used to manage and analyse the data.

    RESULTS: Five main themes emerged from the study: healthcare provider-patient communication, workforce availability, cultural and belief systems, goals of care and paternalism versus autonomy. Other strategies proposed to overcome barriers to implementing shared decision-making were training of healthcare professionals and empowering nurses to manage patients' psychosocial issues.

    CONCLUSION: This study found that practising shared decision-making in the public health sector remains challenging when managing patients with metastatic breast cancer. The utilization of decision-making tools, patient empowerment and healthcare provider training may help address the system and healthcare provider-patient barriers identified in this study.

    PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients were involved in the study design, recruitment and analysis.

  2. Angelakopoulos N, De Luca S, Oliveira-Santos I, Ribeiro ILA, Bianchi I, Balla SB, et al.
    Int J Legal Med, 2023 Mar;137(2):403-425.
    PMID: 36520207 DOI: 10.1007/s00414-022-02930-x
    Identification of living undocumented individuals highlights the need for accurate, precise, and reproducible age estimation methods, especially in those cases involving minors. However, when their country of origin is unknown, or it can be only roughly estimated, it is extremely difficult to apply assessment policies, procedures, and practices that are accurate and child-sensitive. The main aim of this research is to optimize the correct classification of adults and minors by establishing new cut-off values for four different continents (Africa, America, Asia, and Europe). For this purpose, a vast sample of 10,701 orthopantomographs (OPTs) from four continents was evaluated. For determination and subsequent validation of the new third molar maturity index (I3M) cut-off values by world regions, a cross-validation by holdout method was used and contingency tables (confusion matrices) were generated. The lower third molar maturity indexes, from both left and right side (I3ML and I3MR) and the combination of both sides (I3ML_I3MR) were calculated. The new cut-off values, that aim to differentiate between a minor and an adult, with more than 74.00% accuracy for all populations were as follows (I3ML; I3MR; I3ML_I3MR, respectively): Africa = (0.10; 0.10; 0.10), America = (0.10; 0.09; 0.09), Asia = (0.15; 0.17; 0.14), and Europe = (0.09; 0.09; 0.09). The higher sensitivity (Se) was detected for the I3ML for male African people (91%) and the higher specificity (Sp) of all the parameters (I3ML; I3MR; I3ML_I3MR) for Europeans both male and female (> 91%). The original cut-off value (0.08) is still useful, especially in discriminating individuals younger than 18 years old which is the goal of the forensic methods used for justice.
  3. Dhana A, Hamada Y, Kengne AP, Kerkhoff AD, Rangaka MX, Kredo T, et al.
    Lancet Infect Dis, 2022 Apr;22(4):507-518.
    PMID: 34800394 DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00387-X
    BACKGROUND: The WHO-recommended tuberculosis screening and diagnostic algorithm in ambulatory people living with HIV is a four-symptom screen (known as the WHO-recommended four symptom screen [W4SS]) followed by a WHO-recommended molecular rapid diagnostic test (eg Xpert MTB/RIF [hereafter referred to as Xpert]) if W4SS is positive. To inform updated WHO guidelines, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of alternative screening tests and strategies for tuberculosis in this population.

    METHODS: In this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we updated a search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts for publications from Jan 1, 2011, to March 12, 2018, done in a previous systematic review to include the period up to Aug 2, 2019. We screened the reference lists of identified pieces and contacted experts in the field. We included prospective cross-sectional, observational studies and randomised trials among adult and adolescent (age ≥10 years) ambulatory people living with HIV, irrespective of signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. We extracted study-level data using a standardised data extraction form, and we requested individual participant data from study authors. We aimed to compare the W4SS with alternative screening tests and strategies and the WHO-recommended algorithm (ie, W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all in terms of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), overall and in key subgroups (eg, by antiretroviral therapy [ART] status). The reference standard was culture. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020155895.

    FINDINGS: We identified 25 studies, and obtained data from 22 studies (including 15 666 participants; 4347 [27·7%] of 15 663 participants with data were on ART). W4SS sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 72-89) and specificity was 42% (29-57). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) had similar sensitivity to (77% [61-88]), but higher specificity (74% [61-83]; n=3571) than, W4SS. Cough (lasting ≥2 weeks), haemoglobin (<10 g/dL), body-mass index (<18·5 kg/m2), and lymphadenopathy had high specificities (80-90%) but low sensitivities (29-43%). The WHO-recommended algorithm had a sensitivity of 58% (50-66) and a specificity of 99% (98-100); Xpert for all had a sensitivity of 68% (57-76) and a specificity of 99% (98-99). In the one study that assessed both, the sensitivity of sputum Xpert Ultra was higher than sputum Xpert (73% [62-81] vs 57% [47-67]) and specificities were similar (98% [96-98] vs 99% [98-100]). Among outpatients on ART (4309 [99·1%] of 4347 people on ART), W4SS sensitivity was 53% (35-71) and specificity was 71% (51-85). In this population, a parallel strategy (two tests done at the same time) of W4SS with any chest x-ray abnormality had higher sensitivity (89% [70-97]) and lower specificity (33% [17-54]; n=2670) than W4SS alone; at a tuberculosis prevalence of 5%, this strategy would require 379 more rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but detect 18 more tuberculosis cases. Among outpatients not on ART (11 160 [71·8%] of 15 541 outpatients), W4SS sensitivity was 85% (76-91) and specificity was 37% (25-51). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) alone had a similar sensitivity to (83% [79-86]), but higher specificity (67% [60-73]; n=3187) than, W4SS and a sequential strategy (both test positive) of W4SS then C-reactive protein (≥5 mg/L) had a similar sensitivity to (84% [75-90]), but higher specificity than (64% [57-71]; n=3187), W4SS alone; at 10% tuberculosis prevalence, these strategies would require 272 and 244 fewer rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but miss two and one more tuberculosis cases, respectively.

    INTERPRETATION: C-reactive protein reduces the need for further rapid diagnostic tests without compromising sensitivity and has been included in the updated WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines. However, C-reactive protein data were scarce for outpatients on ART, necessitating future research regarding the utility of C-reactive protein in this group. Chest x-ray can be useful in outpatients on ART when combined with W4SS. The WHO-recommended algorithm has suboptimal sensitivity; Xpert for all offers slight sensitivity gains and would have major resource implications.

    FUNDING: World Health Organization.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links