Conectar
In Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games, there were the rule and goal size changes at the blind football competition. This study aimed to compare the scoring and head impact characteristics during blind football competition between the Rio 2016 and Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games using the official videos.
Video-based observational study.
In total, 36 blind football (men’s football 5-a-side) game videos were obtained from the official International Paralympic Committee.
Head impact was defined as the sudden contact of any object with the head. Videos were analysed to assess the number of scores and head impacts along with their corresponding details (ie, round, playing phase, scoring situation, impact situation, occurrence area, impact object, head impact site, fall and foul).
The total number of goals scored at the Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games was nearly double that at the Rio 2016 Paralympic Games. Regarding head impacts, a total of 2036 cases (Rio 2016, n=1105; Tokyo 2020, n=931) were evaluated. Significant differences were observed in head impact characteristics between the Rio 2016 and Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games among seven outcomes (round, scoring situation, impact situation, occurrence area, impact object, site of head impact and fall).
Compared with the Rio 2016 Paralympic Games, the Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games showed an increase in the number of points scored and different head impact characteristics.
Incisional scarring is a factor of cosmetic appearance evaluated after breast reconstruction, along with the shape, position, and size of the breast. This study aimed to examine the effect of the incision scar location on patient satisfaction after breast reconstruction. Using the Japanese version of the SCAR-Q, we assessed the scar appearance, symptoms and psychosocial effects. Plastic surgeons performed assessments using the Manchester Scar Scale. The patients were divided into two groups: those with scars on the margins of the breast (MB group) and those with scars in the breast area (IB group). The results revealed that patients in the MB group reported significantly higher satisfaction with the scar appearance and psychological impact than those in the IB group. However, assessments using the Manchester Scar Scale did not reveal any significant differences between the two groups. In conclusion, this study underscores the importance of patient-reported outcomes in the evaluation of scar satisfaction after breast reconstruction. Patients tend to prefer and have higher satisfaction with scars along the breast margin, which offers valuable insights into surgical decisions. Further studies with larger and more diverse sample sizes are required for validation.
The rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has raised concerns regarding waning vaccine-induced immunity and durability. We evaluated protection of the third-dose and fourth-dose mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariant and its sublineages.
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Electronic databases and other resources (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINAHL PLUS, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect, MedRxiv and bioRxiv) were searched until December 2022.
We included studies that assessed the effectiveness of mRNA vaccine booster doses against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes caused by the subvariant.
Estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) at different time points after the third-dose and fourth-dose vaccination were extracted. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to compare VE of the third dose versus the primary series, no vaccination and the fourth dose at different time points. The certainty of the evidence was assessed by Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluation approach.
This review included 50 studies. The third-dose VE, compared with the primary series, against SARS-CoV-2 infection was 48.86% (95% CI 44.90% to 52.82%, low certainty) at ≥14 days, and gradually decreased to 38.01% (95% CI 13.90% to 62.13%, very low certainty) at ≥90 days after the third-dose vaccination. The fourth-dose VE peaked at 14–30 days (56.70% (95% CI 50.36% to 63.04%), moderate certainty), then quickly declined at 61–90 days (22% (95% CI 6.40% to 37.60%), low certainty). Compared with no vaccination, the third-dose VE was 75.84% (95% CI 40.56% to 111.12%, low certainty) against BA.1 infection, and 70.41% (95% CI 49.94% to 90.88%, low certainty) against BA.2 infection at ≥7 days after the third-dose vaccination. The third-dose VE against hospitalisation remained stable over time and maintained 79.30% (95% CI 58.65% to 99.94%, moderate certainty) at 91–120 days. The fourth-dose VE up to 60 days was 67.54% (95% CI 59.76% to 75.33%, moderate certainty) for hospitalisation and 77.88% (95% CI 72.55% to 83.21%, moderate certainty) for death.
The boosters provided substantial protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes for at least 6 months, although the duration of protection remains uncertain, suggesting the need for a booster dose within 6 months of the third-dose or fourth-dose vaccination. However, the certainty of evidence in our VE estimates varied from very low to moderate, indicating significant heterogeneity among studies that should be considered when interpreting the findings for public health policies.
CRD42023376698.
The Japanese government suspended the proactive recommendation of the human papillomavirus vaccine (HPVv) in 2013, and the vaccination rate of HPVv declined to
Cross-sectional study analysed data obtained through a web-based, self-administered questionnaire survey.
The questionnaire was distributed to Japan Primary Care Association (JPCA) members.
JPCA members who were physicians and on the official JPCA mailing list (n=5395) were included.
The primary and secondary outcomes were the administration and recommendation of HPVv, respectively, by PCPs. The association between PCPs’ knowledge regarding vaccination and each outcome was determined based on their background and vaccination quiz scores and a logistic regression analysis to estimate the adjusted ORs (AORs).
We received responses from 1084 PCPs and included 981 of them in the analysis. PCPs with a higher score on the vaccination quiz were significantly more likely to administer the HPVv for routine and voluntary vaccination (AOR 2.28, 95% CI 1.58 to 3.28; AOR 2.71, 95% CI 1.81 to 4.04, respectively) and recommend the HPVv for routine and voluntary vaccination than PCPs with a lower score (AOR 2.17, 95% CI 1.62 to 2.92; AOR 1.88, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.67, respectively).
These results suggest that providing accurate knowledge regarding vaccination to PCPs may improve their administration and recommendation of HPVv, even in the absence of active government recommendations.
FreshRSS 