1.A review on emerging smart technological innovations in healthcare sector for increasing patient's medication adherence
Pal PANKAJ ; Sambhakar SHARDA ; Dave VIVEK ; Paliwal Kumar SHAILENDRA ; Paliwal SARVESH ; Sharma MONIKA ; Kumar AADESH ; Dhama NIDHI
Global Health Journal 2021;5(4):183-189
In this paper,we reviewed the various advanced technologies and methods that could help patients for measuring adherence of patients.There exist intelligent technologies that are available for measuring medication adherence,including medication event monitoring system (MEMS(R)),smart blister packs,radio frequency identification(RFID) embedded smart drawers,and wisely aware RFID dosage (WARD) system.Utilization of these advanced technologies and systems have aided in enhancing the adherence to a greater extent.For example,MEMS(R) refers to the electronic cap that counts the number of bottles opened,but it can be employed only with bottles.Smart blisters are pharmaceutical packagings that possess the capability of monitoring when a pill or tablet is taken out of its packing.All those intelligent technologies can help in active monitoring of patients regarding adherence and capable of eradicating various medication errors due to which adherence is affected.
2.A randomized prospective study comparing acute toxicity, compliance and objective response rate between simultaneous integrated boost and sequential intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer
Akanksha GROVER ; Tej Prakash SONI ; Nidhi PATNI ; Dinesh Kumar SINGH ; Naresh JAKHOTIA ; Anil Kumar GUPTA ; Lalit Mohan SHARMA ; Shantanu SHARMA ; Ravindra Singh GOTHWAL
Radiation Oncology Journal 2021;39(1):15-23
Purpose:
Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) provides higher dose to target volumes and limits the dose to normal tissues. IMRT may be applied using either simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-IMRT) or sequential boost (SEQ-IMRT) technique. The objectives of this study were to compare acute toxicity and objective response rates between SIB-IMRT and SEQ-IMRT in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer.
Materials and Methods:
Total 110 patients with locally advanced carcinoma of oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx were randomized equally into the two arms (SIB-IMRT vs. SEQ-IMRT). Patients in SIB-IMRT arm received dose of 66 Gy in 30 fractions, 5 days a week, over 6 weeks. SEQ-IMRT arm’s patients received 70 Gy in 35 fractions over 7 weeks. Weekly concurrent cisplatin chemotherapy was given in both arms. Patients were assessed for acute toxicities during the treatment and for objective response at 3 months after the radiotherapy.
Results:
Grade 3 dysphagia was significantly more with SIB-IMRT compared to SEQ-IMRT (72% vs. 41.2%; p = 0.006) but other toxicities including mucositis, dermatitis, xerostomia, weight-loss, incidence of nasogastric tube intubation and hospitalization for supportive management were similar in both the arms. Patients in SIB-IMRT arm showed better treatment-compliance and had significantly less treatment-interruption compared to SEQ-IMRT arm (p = 0.028). Objective response rates were similar in both the arms (p = 0.783).
Conclusion
Concurrent chemoradiation with SIB-IMRT for locally advanced head and neck cancer is well-tolerated and results in better treatment-compliance, similar objective response rates, comparable incidence of mucositis and higher incidence of grade 3 dysphagia compared to SEQ-IMRT.
3.A randomized prospective study comparing acute toxicity, compliance and objective response rate between simultaneous integrated boost and sequential intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer
Akanksha GROVER ; Tej Prakash SONI ; Nidhi PATNI ; Dinesh Kumar SINGH ; Naresh JAKHOTIA ; Anil Kumar GUPTA ; Lalit Mohan SHARMA ; Shantanu SHARMA ; Ravindra Singh GOTHWAL
Radiation Oncology Journal 2021;39(1):15-23
Purpose:
Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) provides higher dose to target volumes and limits the dose to normal tissues. IMRT may be applied using either simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-IMRT) or sequential boost (SEQ-IMRT) technique. The objectives of this study were to compare acute toxicity and objective response rates between SIB-IMRT and SEQ-IMRT in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer.
Materials and Methods:
Total 110 patients with locally advanced carcinoma of oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx were randomized equally into the two arms (SIB-IMRT vs. SEQ-IMRT). Patients in SIB-IMRT arm received dose of 66 Gy in 30 fractions, 5 days a week, over 6 weeks. SEQ-IMRT arm’s patients received 70 Gy in 35 fractions over 7 weeks. Weekly concurrent cisplatin chemotherapy was given in both arms. Patients were assessed for acute toxicities during the treatment and for objective response at 3 months after the radiotherapy.
Results:
Grade 3 dysphagia was significantly more with SIB-IMRT compared to SEQ-IMRT (72% vs. 41.2%; p = 0.006) but other toxicities including mucositis, dermatitis, xerostomia, weight-loss, incidence of nasogastric tube intubation and hospitalization for supportive management were similar in both the arms. Patients in SIB-IMRT arm showed better treatment-compliance and had significantly less treatment-interruption compared to SEQ-IMRT arm (p = 0.028). Objective response rates were similar in both the arms (p = 0.783).
Conclusion
Concurrent chemoradiation with SIB-IMRT for locally advanced head and neck cancer is well-tolerated and results in better treatment-compliance, similar objective response rates, comparable incidence of mucositis and higher incidence of grade 3 dysphagia compared to SEQ-IMRT.
4.Prevalence and patterns of post-COVID-19 symptoms in recovered patients of Delhi, India: a population-based study
Nidhi BHATNAGAR ; Mongjam Meghachandra SINGH ; Hitakshi SHARMA ; Suruchi MISHRA ; Gurmeet SINGH ; Shivani RAO ; Amod BORLE ; Tanu ANAND ; Naresh KUMAR ; Binita GOSWAMI ; Sarika SINGH ; Mahima KAPOOR ; Sumeet SINGLA ; Bembem KHURAIJAM ; Nita KHURANA ; Urvi SHARMA ; Suneela GARG
Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives 2024;15(3):229-237
Objectives:
Post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms were widely reported.However, data on post-COVID-19 conditions following infection with the Omicron variant remained scarce. This prospective study was conducted to understand the prevalence, patterns, and duration of symptoms in patients who had recovered from COVID-19.
Methods:
A prospective study was conducted across 11 districts of Delhi, India, among individuals who had recovered from COVID-19. Study participants were enrolled, and then returned for post-recovery follow-up at 3 months and 6 months interval.
Results
The mean age of study participants was 42.07 years, with a standard deviation of 14.89 years. The majority of the participants (79.7%) reported experiencing post-COVID-19 symptoms. The most common symptoms included joint pain (36.0%), persistent dry cough (35.7%), anxiety (28.4%), and shortness of breath (27.1%). Other symptoms were persistent fatigue (21.6%), persistent headache (20.0%), forgetfulness (19.7%), and limb weakness (18.6%). The longest duration of symptom was observed to be anxiety (138.75±54.14 days), followed by fatigue (137.57±48.33 days), shortness of breath (131.89±60.21 days), and joint pain/swelling (131.59±58.76 days). At the first follow-up visit, 2.2% of participants presented with abnormal electrocardiogram readings, but no abnormalities were noticed during the second follow-up. Additionally, 4.06% of participants exhibited abnormal chest X-ray findings at the first follow-up, which decreased to 2.16% by the second visit. Conclusion: The most frequently reported post-COVID-19 symptoms were joint pain, dry cough, anxiety and shortness of breath. These clinical symptoms persisted for up to 6 months, with evidence of multi-system involvement. Consequently, findings highlighted the need for long-term follow-up during the post-COVID-19 period.
5.Is Regular Probiotic Practice Safe for Management of Sepsis?
Rishabh KUMAR ; Alok Shiomurti TRIPATHI ; Nidhi SHARMA ; Gaaminepreet SINGH ; Lucy MOHAPATRA
Chinese journal of integrative medicine 2022;28(2):185-192
For decades, the gut has been thought to play an important role in sepsis pathogenesis. Sepsis is a serious life-threatening, chronic condition of an infection caused by dysregulated host immune response in most of the intensive care unit patients. Probiotics have dual roles in polymicrobial sepsis i.e. probiotics may induce sepsis in many cases and may prevent its prognosis in many cases. Experimental evidence from both pre-clinical and clinical studies have demonstrated that probiotic therapy ameliorates various inflammatory mediators such as tumor necrosis factor, interleukin-10 (IL-10), IL-6, etc., in septicemia. In addition, probiotic use was also found to reduce the severity of pathological conditions associated with irritable bowel disorder and prevent development of endocarditis in septicemia. On contrary, probiotic therapy in neonatal and athymic adult mice fail to provide any beneficial effects on mortality and sepsis-induced inflammation. Importantly, in few clinical trials probiotic use was found to aggravate sepsis by promoting inflammatory cascade rather than suppressing it. This review discusses various studies regarding the beneficial or harmful effects associated with probiotic therapy in sepsis.
Animals
;
Humans
;
Inflammation
;
Mice
;
Probiotics/therapeutic use*
;
Sepsis/therapy*
;
Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha