PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic reliability of a dichotomous digital rectal examination (DRE) tool in assessing prostate volume (PV) compared to gold-standard transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) volume measurement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Male patients presenting to a single tertiary referral centre urology practice requiring TRUS were prospectively recruited between January 2010 and August 2011. Size was estimated by DRE immediately prior to TRUS measurement. DRE measurements were classed into four groups: <30 mL , 30 to 49 mL, 50 to 99 mL and >100 mL. The primary outcomes were sensitivity, specificity, and the positive and negative likelihood ratios for a 30 mL cut-off. RESULTS: Three hundred and three patients were recruited to the study. The median age of the study group was 64.9 years. On TRUS analysis, 244 patients had a PV larger than 30 mL and 139 of them, larger than 50 mL. The median PV was 47 mL with a median International Prostate Symptom Score of 10 and prostatic specific antigen (PSA) of 5.7. When analysed for the ability to identify a gland larger than 30 mL, DRE had a high sensitivity and low negative likelihood ratio. The median PSA level (ng/L) for prostates measured by DRE with a 30 mL cut-off was significantly different with higher median PSA values for volumes larger than 30 mL. CONCLUSIONS: DRE is a reliable tool for dichotomous assessment of prostatic volumes above 30 mL and 50 mL. These results illustrate the value of re-examining the role of categorical DRE estimations in benign prostatic hyperplasia patients.
Diagnostic Tests, Routine ; Digital Rectal Examination* ; Humans ; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms ; Male ; Prospective Studies ; Prostate* ; Prostatic Hyperplasia ; Referral and Consultation ; Ultrasonography ; Urology

Objectives: This study aimed to describe and compare health-related quality of life (QoL) as measured by the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF (WHOQoL-BREF) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) among the Malaysian population, examining differences by sociodemographic characteristics including age, income, sex, ethnicity, educational level, and occupation. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from 19,402 individuals collected as part of a health and demographic surveillance system survey conducted in the Segamat district of Malaysia in 2018–2019. Descriptive statistics and measures of central tendency were produced.Differences in QoL among demographic sub-groups were examined using the t-test and analysisof variance, while the correlations between the WHOQoL-BREF and EQ-5D were evaluated usingPearson correlation coefficients. Results: Based on complete case analysis (n = 19,129), the average scores for the 4 WHOQoLBREF domains were 28.2 (physical), 24.1 (psychological), 12.0 (social relationships), and 30.4 (environment). The percentages of participants not in full health for each EQ-5D dimension were 12.8% (mobility), 3.1% (self-care), 6.9% (usual activities), 20.9% (pain/discomfort), and 6.8% (anxiety/depression). Correlations between the 4 WHOQoL-BREF domains and the 5 EQ-5D dimensions were relatively weak, ranging from –0.06 (social relationships with self-care and pain/discomfort; p < 0.001) to –0.42 (physical with mobility; p < 0.001). Conclusion Although health-related QoL as measured by the WHOQoL-BREF and the EQ-5D are correlated, these 2 measures should not be considered interchangeable. The choice betweenthem should be guided by the specific research questions and the intended use of the data.

Objectives: This study aimed to describe and compare health-related quality of life (QoL) as measured by the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF (WHOQoL-BREF) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) among the Malaysian population, examining differences by sociodemographic characteristics including age, income, sex, ethnicity, educational level, and occupation. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from 19,402 individuals collected as part of a health and demographic surveillance system survey conducted in the Segamat district of Malaysia in 2018–2019. Descriptive statistics and measures of central tendency were produced.Differences in QoL among demographic sub-groups were examined using the t-test and analysisof variance, while the correlations between the WHOQoL-BREF and EQ-5D were evaluated usingPearson correlation coefficients. Results: Based on complete case analysis (n = 19,129), the average scores for the 4 WHOQoLBREF domains were 28.2 (physical), 24.1 (psychological), 12.0 (social relationships), and 30.4 (environment). The percentages of participants not in full health for each EQ-5D dimension were 12.8% (mobility), 3.1% (self-care), 6.9% (usual activities), 20.9% (pain/discomfort), and 6.8% (anxiety/depression). Correlations between the 4 WHOQoL-BREF domains and the 5 EQ-5D dimensions were relatively weak, ranging from –0.06 (social relationships with self-care and pain/discomfort; p < 0.001) to –0.42 (physical with mobility; p < 0.001). Conclusion Although health-related QoL as measured by the WHOQoL-BREF and the EQ-5D are correlated, these 2 measures should not be considered interchangeable. The choice betweenthem should be guided by the specific research questions and the intended use of the data.

Objectives: This study aimed to describe and compare health-related quality of life (QoL) as measured by the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF (WHOQoL-BREF) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) among the Malaysian population, examining differences by sociodemographic characteristics including age, income, sex, ethnicity, educational level, and occupation. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from 19,402 individuals collected as part of a health and demographic surveillance system survey conducted in the Segamat district of Malaysia in 2018–2019. Descriptive statistics and measures of central tendency were produced.Differences in QoL among demographic sub-groups were examined using the t-test and analysisof variance, while the correlations between the WHOQoL-BREF and EQ-5D were evaluated usingPearson correlation coefficients. Results: Based on complete case analysis (n = 19,129), the average scores for the 4 WHOQoLBREF domains were 28.2 (physical), 24.1 (psychological), 12.0 (social relationships), and 30.4 (environment). The percentages of participants not in full health for each EQ-5D dimension were 12.8% (mobility), 3.1% (self-care), 6.9% (usual activities), 20.9% (pain/discomfort), and 6.8% (anxiety/depression). Correlations between the 4 WHOQoL-BREF domains and the 5 EQ-5D dimensions were relatively weak, ranging from –0.06 (social relationships with self-care and pain/discomfort; p < 0.001) to –0.42 (physical with mobility; p < 0.001). Conclusion Although health-related QoL as measured by the WHOQoL-BREF and the EQ-5D are correlated, these 2 measures should not be considered interchangeable. The choice betweenthem should be guided by the specific research questions and the intended use of the data.

Objectives: This study aimed to describe and compare health-related quality of life (QoL) as measured by the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF (WHOQoL-BREF) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) among the Malaysian population, examining differences by sociodemographic characteristics including age, income, sex, ethnicity, educational level, and occupation. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from 19,402 individuals collected as part of a health and demographic surveillance system survey conducted in the Segamat district of Malaysia in 2018–2019. Descriptive statistics and measures of central tendency were produced.Differences in QoL among demographic sub-groups were examined using the t-test and analysisof variance, while the correlations between the WHOQoL-BREF and EQ-5D were evaluated usingPearson correlation coefficients. Results: Based on complete case analysis (n = 19,129), the average scores for the 4 WHOQoLBREF domains were 28.2 (physical), 24.1 (psychological), 12.0 (social relationships), and 30.4 (environment). The percentages of participants not in full health for each EQ-5D dimension were 12.8% (mobility), 3.1% (self-care), 6.9% (usual activities), 20.9% (pain/discomfort), and 6.8% (anxiety/depression). Correlations between the 4 WHOQoL-BREF domains and the 5 EQ-5D dimensions were relatively weak, ranging from –0.06 (social relationships with self-care and pain/discomfort; p < 0.001) to –0.42 (physical with mobility; p < 0.001). Conclusion Although health-related QoL as measured by the WHOQoL-BREF and the EQ-5D are correlated, these 2 measures should not be considered interchangeable. The choice betweenthem should be guided by the specific research questions and the intended use of the data.

Objectives: This study aimed to describe and compare health-related quality of life (QoL) as measured by the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF (WHOQoL-BREF) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) among the Malaysian population, examining differences by sociodemographic characteristics including age, income, sex, ethnicity, educational level, and occupation. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from 19,402 individuals collected as part of a health and demographic surveillance system survey conducted in the Segamat district of Malaysia in 2018–2019. Descriptive statistics and measures of central tendency were produced.Differences in QoL among demographic sub-groups were examined using the t-test and analysisof variance, while the correlations between the WHOQoL-BREF and EQ-5D were evaluated usingPearson correlation coefficients. Results: Based on complete case analysis (n = 19,129), the average scores for the 4 WHOQoLBREF domains were 28.2 (physical), 24.1 (psychological), 12.0 (social relationships), and 30.4 (environment). The percentages of participants not in full health for each EQ-5D dimension were 12.8% (mobility), 3.1% (self-care), 6.9% (usual activities), 20.9% (pain/discomfort), and 6.8% (anxiety/depression). Correlations between the 4 WHOQoL-BREF domains and the 5 EQ-5D dimensions were relatively weak, ranging from –0.06 (social relationships with self-care and pain/discomfort; p < 0.001) to –0.42 (physical with mobility; p < 0.001). Conclusion Although health-related QoL as measured by the WHOQoL-BREF and the EQ-5D are correlated, these 2 measures should not be considered interchangeable. The choice betweenthem should be guided by the specific research questions and the intended use of the data.

Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has emerged as a pivotal tool for diagnosing and risk-stratifying patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Recent advancements in image analysis and artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have enabled the comprehensive quantitative analysis of coronary atherosclerosis. Fully quantitative assessments of coronary stenosis and lumen attenuation have improved the accuracy of assessing stenosis severity and predicting hemodynamically significant lesions. In addition to stenosis evaluation, quantitative plaque analysis plays a crucial role in predicting and monitoring CAD progression. Studies have demonstrated that the quantitative assessment of plaque subtypes based on CT attenuation provides a nuanced understanding of plaque characteristics and their association with cardiovascular events.Quantitative analysis of serial CCTA scans offers a unique perspective on the impact of medical therapies on plaque modification. However, challenges such as time-intensive analyses and variability in software platforms still need to be addressed for broader clinical implementation. The paradigm of CCTA has shifted towards comprehensive quantitative plaque analysis facilitated by technological advancements. As these methods continue to evolve, their integration into routine clinical practice has the potential to enhance risk assessment and guide individualized patient management. This article reviews the evolving landscape of quantitative plaque analysis in CCTA and explores its applications and limitations.

The personal recovery movement is beginning to gain traction within Singapore's mental healthcare systems. We believe it is timely to give a broad overview of how it developed and provide suggestions on how it can evolve further. From the early custodial care in the 1800s to the community-centric programmes of the 1900s and early 2000s, we now find ourselves at the forefront of yet another paradigm shift towards a more consumer-centric model of care. The following decades will allow personal recovery practitioners and researchers to innovate and identify unique but culturally appropriate care frameworks. We also discuss how the movement can continue to complement existing mental healthcare systems and efforts.
Forecasting ; Humans ; Singapore

PURPOSE: We wanted to investigate the efficacy and safety of the immunotherapeutic Uro-Vaxom for treating uncomplicated recurrent cystitis in female patients only. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult female patients were enrolled in this multicenter, open-label study if they had acute cystitis at the enrollment visit and positive results on urine culture (> or =10(3)CFU/ml). The patients were treated for 3 months with one capsule daily of Uro-Vaxom after antibiotic therapy, and they were observed for another 3 months. The primary efficacy criteria were the cystitis recurrence rates over 6 months, the distribution of cystitis and the proportion of patients with cystitis. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients were evaluated. During the 6-month trial, the number of cystitis recurrences was significantly reduced in comparison with the 6-month pretrial period (on the average 0.64 as compared to 3.0 recurrences, respectively p<0.001). The incidences of frequency, urgency and dysuria remained low until the end of the trial. Uro-Vaxom was well tolerated: side-effects were mentioned by 8% of the 50 patients, and there was no case leading to treatment withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: Uro-Vaxom significantly reduced the incidence of cystitis during the 6 months of this study, including the 3 months of treatment. These results demonstrate that Uro-Vaxom is a valuable agent for prophylaxis of recurrent cystitis.
Adult ; Cystitis* ; Dysuria ; Escherichia coli ; Female ; Humans ; Incidence ; Recurrence

Background/Aims: Depression and anxiety are associated with poorer outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the prevalence of depression and anxiety in HCC are unclear. We aimed to establish the prevalence of depression and anxiety in patients with HCC. Methods: MEDLINE and Embase were searched and original articles reporting prevalence of anxiety or depression in patients with HCC were included. A generalized linear mixed model with Clopper-Pearson intervals was used to obtain the pooled prevalence of depression and anxiety in patients with HCC. Risk factors were analyzed via a fractional-logistic regression model. Results: Seventeen articles involving 64,247 patients with HCC were included. The pooled prevalence of depression and anxiety in patients with HCC was 24.04% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.99–38.11%) and 22.20% (95% CI, 10.07–42.09%) respectively. Subgroup analysis determined that the prevalence of depression was lowest in studies where depression was diagnosed via clinician-administered scales (16.07%;95% CI, 4.42–44.20%) and highest in self-reported scales (30.03%; 95% CI, 17.19–47.01%). Depression in patients with HCC was lowest in the Americas (16.44%; 95% CI, 6.37–36.27%) and highest in South-East Asia (66.67%; 95% CI, 56.68–75.35%). Alcohol consumption, cirrhosis, and college education significantly increased risk of depression in patients with HCC. Conclusions One in four patients with HCC have depression, while one in five have anxiety. Further studies are required to validate these findings, as seen from the wide CIs in certain subgroup analyses. Screening strategies for depression and anxiety should also be developed for patients with HCC.