Exploring the quality of life of cosmetic users: A cross-sectional analysis from eight Arab countries in the Middle East

Background The use of cosmetic products is growing in dominance in the Arab population, making it essential to measure its effects on users. The production of cosmetics has been largely driven by consumerism and a bid to keep abreast with the latest trends in the beauty industry with less attention on how the users' quality of life (QoL) is affected. Aims This study aims to investigate the effect of cosmetic products on users' quality of life in eight Arab countries. Methods A cross-sectional study was carried out using an online data collection approach. A validated and specialist instrument tool called BeautyQoL, which consists of five domains and a total of 52 questions, was distributed to a sample of 2219 cosmetic users. Descriptive and inferential statistical analysis was done using SPSS® version 26.0. Results The mean age of participants was 34 ± 11.25 years, and more women were represented in the sample (71%) than men. The majority of respondents had oily skin type (39.6%) and tan skin tone (30.4%). QoL through cosmetic use is computed with a mean score of 51 out of 100. The users' mean score satisfaction from cosmetic use is centred on attractiveness (56.1), followed by self-confidence (51.8). Cosmetics have a statistically significant effect on participants who are young adults, women, single, and employed with high income. As the respondents' skin tone deepens from very fair to dark, the mean score for each domain significantly increases, whereas when skin type changes from very oily to dry, the mean score for each domain decreases. Conclusion The effect of cosmetics on the users' QoL is limited, contrary to the narrative commonly portrayed in cosmetics' advertisements. Therefore, the use of cosmetics among the Arab population should be from an informed perspective of their specific needs instead of conforming to the viral trends pedaled by influencers and bloggers on social media, which might be irrelevant for them.Open access publishing facilitated by Monash University, as part of the Wiley - Monash University agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians. [Correction added on 5 July 2022, after first online publication: CAUL funding statement has been added.]Scopu

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research