Background: The medical curriculum is one of the most stressful academic curricula worldwide. Studies indicate that great levels of stress, that encompass academics to personal life, may be connected to a number of worrying statistics for the mental health of Philippine medical students. Objectives: To develop a validated stressor-coping style scale for students in a public medical school. Methods: The study employed a sequential mixed-methods design. An open-ended questionnaire was used to determine the common stressors and coping styles through convenience sampling. A scale was constructed from this data and was statistically tested for concurrent validity and reliability from a random sample. Results: Following thematic analysis, an initial six stressor domains and eleven coping mechanisms were identified. However, after item analysis and principal component analysis of responses, the scale was transformed to seven stressor domains and five coping mechanism domains. All of which are deemed internally consistent (α>0.6). Scores from the scale were also convergent with the scores of Brief COPE (r=0.5 to 0.9). Conclusions The developed stressor-coping style scale for medical students is a reliable and valid tool for Filipino medical students in a public medical school.
Students, Medical

BACKGROUND

The medical curriculum is one of the most stressful academic curricula worldwide. Studies indicate that great levels of stress, that encompass academics to personal life, may be connected to a number of worrying statistics for the mental health of Philippine medical students.

To develop a validated stressor-coping style scale for students in a public medical school.

The study employed a sequential mixed-methods design. An open-ended questionnaire was used to determine the common stressors and coping styles through convenience sampling. A scale was constructed from this data and was statistically tested for concurrent validity and reliability from a random sample.

Following thematic analysis, an initial six stressor domains and eleven coping mechanisms were identified. However, after item analysis and principal component analysis of responses, the scale was transformed to seven stressor domains and five coping mechanism domains. All of which are deemed internally consistent (α>0.6). Scores from the scale were also convergent with the scores of Brief COPE (r=0.5 to 0.9).

The developed stressor-coping style scale for medical students is a reliable and valid tool for Filipino medical students in a public medical school.

Objective: To develop and validate a novel scoring system for predicting the risk of uterine perforation during brachytherapy (BT) in cervical cancer patients and to stratify patients based on this score to guide the use of ultrasound guidance during BT. Methods: Fifty patients with uterine perforation during BT between January 2018 and December 2020 were included. Common reasons for perforation were identified and a scoring system was developed. This was then applied to a cohort of 50 patients without perforation. The 2 cohorts were compared using the χ 2 test. To validate the scoring system, all newly diagnosed patients who underwent BT in 2021 were scored, and analysed using χ 2 test and receiver operator characteristic curves. Results: The mean score in the test cohort was 10.16 (range=7–14) and 5.92 (range=5–8) for patients with and without perforation. In the validation cohort, the mean score was 6.9 (range=5–10) and 9.33 (range=7–11) for those with and without perforation. Patients with a score <8 were classified as low risk, while those with a score ≥8 were classified as high risk. Among the criteria evaluated for validation, response to external beam radiotherapy, uterine position, cervico-uterine angle (uterine flexion), identification of cervical os at BT assessment, and the total score were significant predictors, while previous history of perforation, uterine length, and additional uterine anomaly were not. Conclusion The novel scoring system is an effective predictor of perforation risk during BT. Implementing this during BT assessment can optimize the need for ultrasound guidance during the procedure.

Objective: To develop and validate a novel scoring system for predicting the risk of uterine perforation during brachytherapy (BT) in cervical cancer patients and to stratify patients based on this score to guide the use of ultrasound guidance during BT. Methods: Fifty patients with uterine perforation during BT between January 2018 and December 2020 were included. Common reasons for perforation were identified and a scoring system was developed. This was then applied to a cohort of 50 patients without perforation. The 2 cohorts were compared using the χ 2 test. To validate the scoring system, all newly diagnosed patients who underwent BT in 2021 were scored, and analysed using χ 2 test and receiver operator characteristic curves. Results: The mean score in the test cohort was 10.16 (range=7–14) and 5.92 (range=5–8) for patients with and without perforation. In the validation cohort, the mean score was 6.9 (range=5–10) and 9.33 (range=7–11) for those with and without perforation. Patients with a score <8 were classified as low risk, while those with a score ≥8 were classified as high risk. Among the criteria evaluated for validation, response to external beam radiotherapy, uterine position, cervico-uterine angle (uterine flexion), identification of cervical os at BT assessment, and the total score were significant predictors, while previous history of perforation, uterine length, and additional uterine anomaly were not. Conclusion The novel scoring system is an effective predictor of perforation risk during BT. Implementing this during BT assessment can optimize the need for ultrasound guidance during the procedure.

Objective: To develop and validate a novel scoring system for predicting the risk of uterine perforation during brachytherapy (BT) in cervical cancer patients and to stratify patients based on this score to guide the use of ultrasound guidance during BT. Methods: Fifty patients with uterine perforation during BT between January 2018 and December 2020 were included. Common reasons for perforation were identified and a scoring system was developed. This was then applied to a cohort of 50 patients without perforation. The 2 cohorts were compared using the χ 2 test. To validate the scoring system, all newly diagnosed patients who underwent BT in 2021 were scored, and analysed using χ 2 test and receiver operator characteristic curves. Results: The mean score in the test cohort was 10.16 (range=7–14) and 5.92 (range=5–8) for patients with and without perforation. In the validation cohort, the mean score was 6.9 (range=5–10) and 9.33 (range=7–11) for those with and without perforation. Patients with a score <8 were classified as low risk, while those with a score ≥8 were classified as high risk. Among the criteria evaluated for validation, response to external beam radiotherapy, uterine position, cervico-uterine angle (uterine flexion), identification of cervical os at BT assessment, and the total score were significant predictors, while previous history of perforation, uterine length, and additional uterine anomaly were not. Conclusion The novel scoring system is an effective predictor of perforation risk during BT. Implementing this during BT assessment can optimize the need for ultrasound guidance during the procedure.

Methods: Patients diagnosed with cervical degenerative spondylolisthesis were identified from a hospital’s medical records. Demographic and surgical characteristics were collected through a structured query language search and manual chart review. Radiographic measurements were made on preoperative MRIs for all vertebral levels diagnosed with spondylolisthesis and adjacent undiagnosed levels between C3 and C6. The facet fluid index was calculated by dividing the facet fluid measurement by the width of the facet. Bivariate analysis was conducted to compare facet characteristics based on radiographic spondylolisthesis and spondylolisthesis stability. Results: We included 154 patients, for whom 149 levels were classified as having spondylolisthesis and 206 levels did not. The average facet fluid index was significantly higher in patients with spondylolisthesis (0.26±0.07 vs. 0.23±0.08, p <0.001). In addition, both fluid width and facet width were significantly larger in patients with spondylolisthesis (p <0.001 each). Cervical levels in the fusion construct demonstrated a greater facet fluid index and were more likely to have unstable spondylolisthesis than stable spondylolisthesis (p <0.001 each). Conclusions Facet fluid index is associated with cervical spondylolisthesis and an increased facet size and fluid width are associated with unstable spondylolisthesis. While cervical spondylolisthesis continues to be an inconclusive finding, vertebral levels with spondylolisthesis, especially the unstable ones, were more likely to be included in the fusion procedure than those without spondylolisthesis.

Methods: We assessed baseline neutral upright, standing flexion, seated lateral radiographs, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients identified with spondylolisthesis from January 2021 to May 2022 by a single spine surgeon. DS was classified by Meyerding and Clinical and Radiographic Degenerative Spondylolisthesis classifications. A difference of >10° or >8% between views, respectively, was used to characterize angular and translational instability. Analysis of variance and paired chi-square tests were utilized to compare modalities. Results: A total of 136 patients were included. Seated lateral and standing flexion radiographs showed the greatest slip percentage (16.0% and 16.7%), while MRI revealed the lowest (12.2%, p <0.001). Standing flexion and lateral radiographs when seated produced more kyphosis (4.66° and 4.97°, respectively) than neutral upright and MRI (7.19° and 7.20°, p <0.001). Seated lateral performed similarly to standing flexion in detecting all measurement parameters and categorizing DS (all p >0.05). Translational instability was shown to be more prevalent when associated with seated lateral or standing flexion than when combined with neutral upright (31.5% vs. 20.2%, p =0.041; and 28.1% vs. 14.6%, p =0.014, respectively). There were no differences between seated lateral or standing flexion in the detection of instability (all p >0.20). Conclusions Seated lateral radiographs are appropriate alternatives for standing flexion radiographs. Films taken when standing up straight do not offer any more information for DS detection. Rather than standing flexion-extension radiographs, instability can be detected using an MRI, which is often performed preoperatively, paired with a single seated lateral radiograph.

Methods: Patients >18 years old who underwent primary one- or two-level TLIFs at our institution were identified and propensitymatched in a 3:1 fashion (unilateral:bilateral). Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and radiographic outcomes, including vertebral endplate obliquity, segmental lordosis, subsidence, and fusion status, were compared between groups. Results: Of the 184 patients included, 46 received bilateral cages. Bilateral cage placement was associated with greater subsidence (1.06±1.25 mm vs. 0.59±1.16 mm, p=0.028) and enhanced restoration of segmental lordosis (5.74°±14.1° vs. −1.57°±10.9°, p=0.002) at the 1-year postoperative point, while unilateral cage placement was associated with an increased correction of endplate obliquity (−2.02°±4.42° vs. 0.24°±2.81°, p<0.001). Bilateral cage placement was significantly associated with radiographic fusion on bivariate analysis (89.1% vs. 70.3%, p=0.018) and significantly predicted radiographic fusion on multivariable regression analysis (estimate, 1.35; odds ratio, 3.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.51–12.05; p=0.010). Conclusions Bilateral interbody cage placement in TLIF procedures was associated with restoration of lumbar lordosis and increased fusion rates. However, endplate obliquity correction was significantly greater for patients who received a unilateral cage.

Methods: All patients aged >18 years who underwent primary one- to four-level ACDF at a single institution were retrospectively identified. Propensity matching was performed to compare patients’ PEEK or titanium alloy cages with structural allograft. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to measure the effect of interbody spacer composition on the likelihood of pseudarthrosis development. Results: Of the 502 patients who received structural allograft and had 1-year postoperative dynamic radiographs, 96 patients were propensity matched to 32 patients who received a PEEK cage, and 162 patients were propensity matched to 54 patients who received a titanium alloy cage. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified that PEEK cage implants (odds ratio [OR], 3.34; p =0.007) predicted pseudarthrosis development compared with structural allograft implantation. Titanium alloy cage (OR, 1.64; p =0.156) implantation was not predictive of pseudarthrosis. One-year postoperative PROMs were not significantly different between patients who received PEEK or titanium alloy cages and those who received structural allograft (all p >0.05). Conclusions Compared with structural allograft, receiving a PEEK cage increased the risk of pseudarthrosis development following ACDF, whereas receiving a titanium alloy cage had no significant effect on pseudarthrosis development. One-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes were similar between patients who received structural allograft, PEEK, and titanium alloy interbody spacers.

Background/Aims: The functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) device has been used to assess pyloric dysfunction in patients with gastroparesis. We aim to investigate whether varying FLIP catheter positions affect pyloric FLIP measurements. Methods: Patients undergoing endoscopy for chronic unexplained nausea and vomiting (CUNV) or gastroparesis were prospectively enrolled. FLIP balloon was adjusted for 3 positions within the pylorus: (1) proximal position, 75% of FLIP balloon in the duodenum and 25% in the antrum; (2) middle position, 50% in the duodenum and 50% in the antrum; and (3) distal position, 25% in the duodenum and 75% in the antrum. Pylorus cross-sectional area (CSA), intra-bag pressure (P), and distensibility indices (DI) were measured for 30, 40, and 50-mL balloon volumes. Fluoroscopic images were obtained to confirm FLIP balloon geometry. Data was analyzed separately using FLIP Analytic and customized MATLAB software. Results: Twenty-two patients with CUNV (n = 4) and gastroparesis (n = 18) were enrolled. Pressures were significantly higher in the proximal position compared to the middle and distal positions. CSA measurements were significantly higher at the proximal and middle positions for 30-mL and 40-mL volume compared to the distal position values. DI values were significantly lower at the proximal positions for 40-mL and 50-mL distensions when compared to the middle and distal positions. Fluoroscopic images confirmed increased balloon bending when placed mostly in the duodenum. Conclusions FLIP balloon position within the pylorus directly affects balloon geometry which significantly affects P, CSA, and DI measurements. Standardized pyloric FLIP protocols and balloon design adjustments are needed for the continued application of this technology to the pylorus.