Abstract Background: Sarcopenia and frailty are common geriatric syndromes that may contribute to mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Evidence regarding the independent roles of individual sarcopenia components and frailty in MCI remains limited in low- and middle-income countries. This study evaluated the association between sarcopenia components, frailty, and MCI among older adults in Indonesia. Methods: An ambispective cohort study was conducted among adults aged ≥60 years attending the Geriatric Outpatient Clinic of Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo National General Hospital, Jakarta. Sarcopenia components were assessed using SARC-Calf (low muscle mass indicator), handgrip strength, and the five-times sit-to-stand test. Frailty was evaluated using the FRAIL scale. Cognitive function was assessed using the Rapid Cognitive Screening. Multivariate log-binomial or Poisson regression with robust variance was used to estimate adjusted risk ratios (RRs) for MCI. Results: A total of 121 participants (median age 74 years; 68.6% female) were included, with an MCI prevalence of 21.5%. After adjustment for confounders, low muscle mass indicator (RR 2.206; 95% CI 1.045–4.652) and low muscle strength (RR 3.006; 95% CI 1.202–7.517) were independently associated with MCI. Low physical performance (RR 1.773; 95% CI 0.796–3.773) and frailty (RR 1.086; 95% CI 0.377–3.134) were not significantly associated with MCI. Conclusion: Low muscle mass indicators and reduced muscle strength were independently associated with MCI, supporting the integration of simple sarcopenia screening tools into routine geriatric cognitive assessment.
sarcopenia ; frailty ; mild cognitive impairment ; rapid cognitive screening

Objectives: This study aimed to examine the impact of work schedule and work position on fatigue levels among employees at a private geothermal firm in Indonesia during the COVID-19 pandemic. The company has modified its work schedule considering the COVID-19 epidemic to ensure a continuous supply of energy and meet the needs of the public. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, the dependent variable is fatigue, which is classified as a latent variable. Fatigue is assessed using the Indonesian version of the Swedish Occupational Fatigue Inventory (SOFI). Fatigue is a condition that has five dimensions: lack of energy, physical exertion, physical discomfort, sleepiness, and lack of motivation. The observed variables in this study include work schedule and work position, which serve as independent variables. Using structural equation modeling (SEM), we assessed the impact of the independent variables on each dimension of fatigue. This approach allowed for the analysis of both the measurement and structural models. Results: The investigation employed total sampling, involving 132 workers from the company who willingly participated in the study. According to the findings, workers' main fatigue dimension was lack of energy. However, the statistical analysis did not establish a significant influence of work schedule and work position on fatigue. Conclusion Based on the findings of the SEM analysis, it is evident that there is no statistically significant correlation between work schedules and job positions with various dimensions of fatigue assessed using the SOFI questionnaire. These dimensions include lack of energy, physical exertion, physical discomfort, sleepiness, and lack of motivation. While this outcome suggests that work schedules and job positions may not directly influence fatigue levels as measured in this study, it underscores the importance of implementing occupational health and safety management systems. Additionally, promoting good work practices such as offering flexible working hours may help address potential fatigue concerns among employees. However, further research is necessary to explore additional variables that could potentially impact fatigue levels in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.
Work Schedule ; Personnel Staffing and Scheduling

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted technical workers who work more often in the field (e.g., engineering, mechanical, health safety environment (HSE), quality control, and production workers) with increasingly complex workloads and work pressures. Few studies have yet to examine the job satisfaction of such workers using a combination of psychological and organizational factors during difficult times, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: This study aims to explain whether psychological and organizational factors affect employee job satisfaction as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This quantitative research uses Partial Least Square-Structural Equation Modeling. A survey with a questionnaire was used to collect data in this study. Using the non-probability sampling technique, data from 103 respondents spread throughout four Similar Exposure Groups (SEGs) in Indonesia were collected. Data analysis in this study used SmartPLS 3.0. Results: Male workers in this study constituted more than 90% of the respondents, the majority with a long working period (more than five years). Worker experience was directly proportional to worker age; most workers were between 41 and 56 years old. The results, with a majority of SEGs from engineering, found that out of five hypotheses (H1–H5), four are accepted while one is rejected. Employee job satisfaction during this pandemic is influenced by the feeling of safety (H1) and work pressure (H3). Work pressure is further influenced by the feeling of safety at work (H2). Moreover, work pressure acts as a mediator on the feeling of safety and job satisfaction (H4). However, job satisfaction is not influenced by management commitment (H5). Conclusion Management commitment to work safety during pandemic situations must be adjusted, especially regarding policies to ensure the availability of additional standards on health protocols to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the workplace. In addition, the guarantee that the company is committed to ensuring that workers feel safe will be covered if exposed to COVID-19. Occupational safety and health standards are no longer fully focused on work equipment or facilities. The feeling of safety and work pressure during a pandemic require attention from companies in accordance with their existing limitations and capabilities.
Job Satisfaction ; COVID-19

Adherence to pharmacological therapies are keys to effective treatments in diabetic patients. Previous reviews found that most adherence measurement studies on chronic diseases used a self-reported scale. However, there is no consensus on the best scale to measure adherence in diabetic patients. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the potential self-reported scale that could be considered for measuring medication adherence in diabetic patients and to provide recommendations for researchers or clinicians to determine appropriate adherence self-reported scales in diabetic patients. This review follows general guidelines in the implementation of systematic reviews. After further review, it was found that 33 studies met all inclusion criteria from 4 databases (Wiley, Science Direct, Scopus, and PubMed). The articles were done by the PRISMA, while the keywords were determined by the PICO method. Most research was conducted in Asia (69.7%) and America (18.2%) on patients with type 2 diabetes (81.3%), patients in hospitals (54.5%), suffering for 1–6 months (54.5%), and using a cross-sectional study design (78.8%). HbA1c clinic data (57.6%) were used in most studies as biological markers of adherence. The measurement scales of medication adherence in diabetic patients are MMAS-8 (57,.5%), MMAS-4 (12.1%), BMQ (9%), MCQ (6%), ARMS (3%), ARMS-D (3%), GMAS (3%), LMAS-14 (3%), and MARS-5 (3%). This review provides information on the different self-reported scales most widely used in diabetic medication adherence research. Various aspects need to be considered before choosing the scale of adherence.