FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial: optimisation of perioperative analgesia protocol for uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

Por: Wang · L. F. · Feng · H. X. · Shi · Y. H. · Li · Y. · Zheng · M. T. · Bu · T. · Zhang · Z. R.
Introduction

Postoperative pain after thoracic surgery impairs patients’ quality of life and increases the incidence of respiratory complications. Optimised analgesia strategies include minimally invasive incisions, regional analgesia and early chest tube removal. However, little is known about the optimal analgesic regimen for uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (uVATS).

Methods and analysis

We will conduct a single-centre, prospective, single-blind, randomised trial. The effects of postoperative analgesia will be tested using thoracic paravertebral block (PVB) in combination with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PVB+PCIA), erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in combination with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (ESPB+PCIA) or PCIA alone; 102 patients undergoing uVATS will be enrolled in this study. Patients will be randomly assigned to the PVB group (30 mL of 0.33% ropivacaine with dexamethasone), ESPB group (40 mL of 0.25% ropivacaine with dexamethasone) or control groups. PCIA with sufentanil will be administered to all patients after surgery. The primary outcome will be total opioid consumption after surgery. Secondary outcomes include postoperative pain score; postoperative chronic pain at rest and during coughing; sensations of touch and pain in the chest wall, non-opioid analgesic consumption; length of stay; ambulation time, the total cost of hospitalisation and long-term postoperative analgesia. Adverse reactions to analgesics and adverse events related to the regional blocks will also be recorded. The statisticians will be blinded to the group allocation. Comparison of the continuous data among the three groups will be performed using a one-way analysis of variance to assess differences among the means.

Ethics and dissemination

The results will be published in patient education courses, academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals.

Trial registration number

NCT06016777.

Associations of eHealth literacy and knowledge with preventive behaviours and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based online survey

Por: Lee · J. J. · Poon · C. Y. · O'Connor · S. · Wong · J. Y. H. · Kwok · J. Y. Y. · Choi · E. P. H. · Tsang · W. N. · Wang · M. P.
Objectives

To compare the associations of COVID-19 preventive behaviours and depressive and anxiety symptoms with eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge among Korean adults.

Design

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in April 2020.

Setting

Seoul metropolitan area in South Korea.

Participants

1057 Korean adults were recruited.

Main outcome measures

Associations between eHealth literacy, COVID-19 knowledge, COVID-19 preventive behaviours and psychological distress were computed using Pearson’s correlation and logistic regression analyses. eHealth literacy, COVID-19 knowledge, COVID-19 preventive behaviours and psychological distress were weighted by sex and age distribution of the general population in Seoul Metropolitan area.

Results

68.40% (n=723) perceived high eHealth literacy level (eHEALS ≥26), while 57.43% (n=605) had high levels of COVID-19 knowledge (score ≥25). No significant association between eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge was identified (r=0.05, p=0.09). eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge were significantly associated with COVID-19 preventive behaviours (aOR=1.99, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.62 L; aOR=1.81, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.34, respectively). High eHealth literacy was significantly associated with anxiety symptom (aOR=1.71, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.47) and depressive symptom (aOR=1.69, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.30). COVID-19 knowledge had negative and no associations with the symptoms (aOR=0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.86; aOR=0.79, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.03, respectively). High eHealth literacy with low COVID-19 knowledge was positively and significantly associated with COVID-19 preventive behaviours (aOR=2.30, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.43), and anxiety (aOR=1.81, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.01) and depressive symptoms (aOR=2.24, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.55). High eHealth literacy with high COVID-19 knowledge were significantly associated with more preventive behaviours (aOR=3.66, 95% CI 2.47 to 5.42) but no significant associations with anxiety and depressive symptoms.

Conclusion

We identified that eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge were not associated each other, and differently associated with individuals’ COVID-19 preventive behaviours and psychological well-being. Public health strategies should pay attention to enhancing both eHealth literacy and COVID-19 knowledge levels in the public to maximise their COVID-19 preventive behaviours and mitigate their psychological distress during COVID-19 pandemic.

❌