Citations

Abstract Objective: Global concern exists for workplace violence against healthcare workers (HCWs), especially in low and middle-income nations. This violence includes physical, verbal, or sexual abuse and has a significant impact despite initiatives like Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines. We conducted a study in Kenya to address this issue. Methods: We did a cross-sectional survey that collected responses during June 6th to August 9th, 2022, focused on healthcare professionals in Kenya within the global ViSHWaS study. Violence against healthcare professionals in multiple Kenyan counties was analysed, The study reached participants through social media, emails, and other channels using a snowball sampling technique. Results: The survey included 1,458 HCWs, primarily females (66.5%), aged 36-45 (42.4%), and of African race, representing 40 counties, with the majority from Nairobi (28.9%) and working in government academic (35.5%) and private academic institutions (20.6%). Most had over 11 years of healthcare experience (64.4%), and registered nurses were the most common cadre (27.8%). Approximately half (49.9%) reported experiencing violence, with verbal violence (80.6%) and emotional abuse (78.6%) being common. Online harassment was reported by only 3.5%, mainly on Facebook (63.2%), involving hate speech (92.1%). Patients or their relatives were the most common aggressors (44.7%), while supervisors accounted for 12.5%. The frequency of violence varied, and 80.2% noted an increase after the COVID-19 pandemic. Only 41.2% of incidents were reported. Most were familiar with safety guidelines (93.6%). Self-violence was associated with familiarity with guidelines, concern about violence, preparedness, and night shifts, while colleague violence was associated with age, gender, race, work experience, training, preparedness, and night shifts. Conclusion: Our Kenya-based cross-sectional sub-analysis highlights that a significant number of HCWs experienced violence, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, which negatively affected job satisfaction. Although most HCWs were familiar with OSHA guidelines, there were difficulties in their practical implementation.

Abstract Background Context Surgical decompression is the definitive treatment for managing symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis; however, select patients are poor surgical candidates. Consequently, minimally invasive procedures have gained popularity, but there exists the potential for failure of therapy necessitating eventual surgical decompression. Purpose To evaluate the incidence and characteristics of patients who require surgical decompression following minimally invasive procedures to treat lumbar spinal stenosis. Study Design/Setting Retrospective review. Patient Sample Patients who underwent minimally invasive procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis (Percutaneous Image‐guided Lumbar Decompression [PILD] or interspinous spacer device [ISD]) and progressed to subsequent surgical decompression within 5 years. Outcome Measures The primary outcome was the rate of surgical decompression within 5 years following the minimally invasive approach. Secondary outcomes included demographic and comorbid factors associated with increased odds of requiring subsequent surgery. Methods Patient data were collected using the PearlDiver‐Mariner database. The rate of subsequent decompression was described as a percentage while univariable and multivariable regression analysis was used for the analysis of predictors. Results A total of 5278 patients were included, of which 3222 (61.04%) underwent PILD, 1959 (37.12%) underwent ISD placement, and 97 (1.84%) had claims for both procedures. Overall, the incidence of subsequent surgical decompression within 5 years was 6.56% (346 of 5278 patients). Variables associated with a significantly greater odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] of requiring subsequent surgical decompression included male gender and a prior history of surgical decompression by 1.42 ([1.14, 1.77], p = 0.002) and 2.10 times ([1.39, 3.17], p < 0.001), respectively. In contrast, age 65 years and above, a diagnosis of obesity, and a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of three or greater were associated with a significantly reduced OR [95% CI] by 0.64 ([0.50, 0.81], p < 0.001), 0.62 ([0.48, 0.81], p < 0.001), and 0.71 times ([0.56, 0.91], p = 0.007), respectively. Conclusions Minimally invasive procedures may provide an additional option to treat symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis in patients who are poor surgical candidates or who do not desire open decompression; however, there still exists a subset of patients who will require subsequent surgical decompression. Factors such as gender and prior surgical decompression increase the likelihood of subsequent surgery, while older age, obesity, and a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score reduce it. These findings aid in selecting suitable surgical candidates for better outcomes in the elderly population with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Abstract Background Inotrope-dependent heart failure (HF) carries a poor prognosis. Advanced mechanical supports have been viewed as primary treatment modalities for these patients, but cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an emerging alternative. Whether CRT is viable in HF patients who require inotropic support is uncertain. Purpose To assess outcomes of CRT in end-stage inotrope-dependent HF. Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library until December 31st 2022, with the following terms: "end-stage heart failure," "catecholamine-dependent overt heart failure," "inotrope-dependent heart failure," "advanced heart failure," "New York Heart Association class IV," "NYHA class IV." These terms were combined with "cardiac resynchronization therapy" OR "CRT" OR "biventricular device". Studies were included if: 1) HF patients required on inotropic support at CRT implantation; 2) patients were at least 18 years old; and 3) provided a clear definition of "inotrope dependence" or "inability to wean." A meta-analysis with random effects was performed in R (Version 3.5.1) with data presented as mean ± standard error. Results 19 studies comprised of 386 inotrope-dependent HF patients (mean age 64.4 ± 1.2 years, 76.9% male, 54.6% non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, mean QRS duration 168.0 ± 4.6 ms, mean follow-up 778 ± 110.7 days) were included for meta-analysis. A large majority of patients survived until discharge at 90% (95% CI: 81.0%-96.8%, I2=51%, p=0.04, Figure 1A), 88.6% were weaned off inotropes (95% CI: 77.5%-96.8%, I2=64%, p&lt;0.01), and mean time to discharge post-CRT was 7.8 days (95% CI: 3.9-11.7, I2= 84%, p&lt;0.01). After one year of follow-up 69.5% survived (95% CI: 59.2%-78.9%, I2=53%, p=0.02, Figure 1B) and 59.1% (95% CI: 50.1%-67.8%, I2=58%, p&lt;0.01, Figure 1C) were alive at the end of follow-up. During follow-up the mean number of hospital admission for HF was reduced by 1.87 (95% CI: 2.70-1.04, I2=77%, p=0.04). Post-CRT mean QRS duration was reduced by 29.0 ms (95% CI: 41.33-16.68, I2=69%, p=0.006, Fig) and mean left ventricular ejection fraction increased by 4.83% (95% CI: 3.09%-6.57%, I2=16%, p=0.31, Fig). The mean NYHA class post-CRT was 2.7 (95% CI: 2.5-3.0, I2=56%, p=0.03, Figure 2A), 39.6% (95% CI: 18,.7%-62.3%, I2=83%, p&lt;0.01, Figure 2C) improved to NYHA class III and 34.6% (95% CI: 16.4%-55.2%, I2=79%, p&lt;0.01, Figure 2D) improved to NYHA class II. Responders to CRT tended be male (85.7% vs. 40%, p=0.015), have a history of left bundle branch block (71.4% vs. 30%, p=0.036) or an increased left ventricular end-diastolic volume (274.3 mL vs. 225.9 mL, p=0.038). Conclusion(s) Our results suggest that CRT is an alternative option for end-stage inotrope-dependent HF, improving survival, NYHA status, and HF readmission. CRT responders appear to be male with evidence of preserved diastolic function or a history of a left bundle branch block.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection has taken the world by storm within a few months. Evidence has suggested that patients with electrolyte imbalances at baseline may have a longer duration of hospital stay. We aimed to determine the factors associated with hyponatremia on admission in COVID-19 patients and its impact on the length of stay. We conducted a retrospective study including 521 patients who tested positive for COVID-19 and had their electrolytes checked on admission from June 2020 to October 2020. Patients with sodium <135 mmol/l were included in the hyponatremic group and were compared against normonatremic patients. The severity of COVID-19 was found to be more prevalent in the case group as compared to control (38.3% vs 29.2%; 21.1% vs 17.7%). Hyponatremic patients stayed more than 5 days in hospital (56.3% vs 46.5%), and stayed longer in special care (23.4% vs 20.0%) as compared to controls. Hyponatremic patients as compared to control were more likely to have diabetes (47.9% vs 30.0%), hypertension (49.0% vs 38.5%), ischemic heart disease (20.7% vs 15.4%), chronic liver disease (2.7% vs 1.2%), and chronic kidney disease (9.6% vs 3.8%). Upon matching on the age, the adjusted odds of hyponatremia in COVID-19-positive patients were 1.9 times among diabetic patients. Moreover, COVID-19-positive patients suffering from CKD had a higher risk of developing hyponatremia (OR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.1–5.6). The risk of hyponatremia among COVID-19-positive patients is statistically higher in patients with 1 comorbidity (OR = 1.9, 95%CI: 1.3–3.4). Hyponatremia on admission can be used to forecast the length of hospital stay and the severity of illness in COVID-19 patients.

Background: Soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) is an inflammatory biomarker that is used to predict mortality, readmission, early discharge, and LOS, thus, serves as a useful tool for ED physicians. Our study aims to analyze the efficacy of suPAR in predicting these prognostic markers in ED. Methods: We performed a comprehensive search on 6 databases from the inception to 30th November 2022, to select the following eligibility criteria; a) observation or triage trial studies investigating the role of suPAR levels in predicting: 30 day and 90-day mortality, 30-day readmission, early discharge (within 24hr), and LOS in patients coming to AMU. Results: A total of 13 studies were included, with a population size of 35,178, of which 52.9% were female with a mean age of 62.93 years. Increased risk of 30-day mortality (RR = 10.52; 95% CI = 4.82–22.95; I2 = 38%; P < .00001), and risk of 90-day mortality (RR = 5.76; 95% CI = 3.35–9.91; I2 = 36%; P < .00001) was observed in high suPAR patients. However, a slightly increased risk was observed for 30-day readmission (RR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.16–1.94; I2 = 54%; P = .002). More people were discharged within 24hr in the low suPAR level group compared to high suPAR group (RR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.40–0.53; I2 = 41%; P < .00001). LOS was thrice as long in high suPAR level patients than in patients with low suPAR (WMD = 3.20; 95% CI = 1.84–4.56; I2 = 99%; P < .00001). Conclusion: suPAR is proven to be a significant marker in predicting 30-day and 90-day mortality in ED patients.

Abstract Endpoint adjudication (EA) is a common feature of contemporary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in cardiovascular medicine. Endpoint adjudication refers to a process wherein a group of expert reviewers, known as the clinical endpoint committee (CEC), verify potential endpoints identified by site investigators. Events that are determined by the CEC to meet pre-specified trial definitions are then utilized for analysis. The rationale behind the use of EA is that it may lessen the potential misclassification of clinical events, thereby reducing statistical noise and bias. However, it has been questioned whether this is universally true, especially given that EA significantly increases the time, effort, and resources required to conduct a trial. Herein, we compare the summary estimates obtained using adjudicated vs. non-adjudicated site designated endpoints in major cardiovascular RCTs in which both were reported. Based on these data, we lay out a framework to determine which trials may warrant EA and where it may be redundant. The value of EA is likely greater when cardiovascular trials have nuanced primary endpoints, endpoint definitions that align poorly with practice, sub-optimal data completeness, greater operator variability, and lack of blinding. EA may not be needed if the primary endpoint is all-cause death or all-cause hospitalization. In contrast, EA is likely merited for more nuanced endpoints such as myocardial infarction, bleeding, worsening heart failure as an outpatient, unstable angina, or transient ischaemic attack. A risk-based approach to adjudication can potentially allow compromise between costs and accuracy. This would involve adjudication of a small proportion of events, with further adjudication done if inconsistencies are detected.

A growing body of research has begun to link exposure to environmental contaminants, such as heavy metals, with a variety of negative health outcomes. In this paper, we sought to review the current research describing the impact of certain common contaminant metals on cardiovascular (CV) health. We reviewed ten metals: lead, barium, nickel, chromium, cadmium, arsenic, mercury, selenium, zinc, and copper. After a literature review, we briefly summarized the routes of environmental exposure, pathophysiological mechanisms, CV health impacts, and exposure prevention and/or mitigation strategies for each metal. The resulting article discloses a broad spectrum of pathological significance, from relatively benign substances with little to no described effects on CV health, such as chromium and selenium, to substances with a wide-ranging and relatively severe spectrum of CV pathologies, such as arsenic, cadmium, and lead. It is our hope that this article will provide clinicians with a practical overview of the impact of these common environmental contaminants on CV health as well as highlight areas that require further investigation to better understand how these metals impact the incidence and progression of CV diseases.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Brain tumors constitute significant morbidity and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Improvements in neuro-oncology practice and research have seen increased diagnosis of brain tumors. However, to our knowledge, there have been no previous projects on brain tumor genetics in SSA. To understand the feasibility of developing brain tumor biobanking and registries, this project aims to start by mapping out the current neuro-oncology capacity in terms of workforce and available services. METHODOLOGY We will conduct a descriptive questionnaire-based online survey among a cross section of neuro-oncology practitioners spread across SSA countries. The dissemination of the survey questionnaire will be facilitated by the Society for Neuro-oncology in SSA (SNOSSA). The Google designed questionnaire will capture information on the distribution, and number of available neuro-oncology care practitioners, capacity for brain tumor diagnosis and management, cancer registration, tumor biobanking, and research. CLINICAL IMPACT AND CONCLUSION This study will generate robust data from SSA, which can be used to improve future research and promote advocacy towards brain tumor diagnosis and management. This work will also serve as a pilot study for subsequent research that will focus on the development of brain tumor-specific registries and biorepositories in SSA.

Background Recruitment for clinical studies is challenging. To overcome barriers, investigators have previously established call-to-entry rates to assist in planning. However, rates specific to low-income minority populations are needed to account for additional barriers to enrolment these individuals face. Objective To obtain a call-to-entry rate in a low-income uninsured Hispanic population with chronic disease. Methods We used data from four of our randomised clinical studies to determine the call-to-entry rate for individuals (n=1075) with or at risk for type 2 diabetes: participants needed/potential participants contacted=recruitment rate (yield). Research staff contacted potential participants to enrol in a study that evaluated 6 month diabetes programmes at community clinics from 2015 to 2020. We recorded call-to-entry rates, reasons for declining the study, show rates, and attrition. Results The call-to-entry rate was 14.5%. Forty per cent of potential participants could not be contacted, and 30.6%, 19.1%, and 5.4% responded yes , no , and maybe , respectively. No show percentages were 54% for yes and 91.4% for maybe responders. The majority (61.6%) declined due to inability to attend; reasons to decline included work (43%), eligibility (18%), transportation (10%), out of town (9%), did not think they needed the programme (7%) and other/unknown (14%). Being a physician predicted inability to reach participants (adjusted OR 2.91, 95% CI 1.73 to 4.90). Attrition was 6.8%. Conclusions We described a call-to-entry rate and detailed recruitment data, including reasons to decline the study. This valuable information can assist investigators in study planning and overcoming enrolment barriers in low-income populations. Telehealth-based or strategies that limit transportation needs may increase participant involvement. Trial registration number NCT03394456 .