The Psychological Impact of Referral for Mammography Screening for Breast Cancer Among Women in Muscat Governorate: A cross-sectional study

Objectives: Breast cancer constitutes the majority of diagnosed cancers in Oman’s females, accounting for 19.2%, which prompted the introduction of a breast cancer screening programme into the Omani healthcare system. There are rising international concerns about the effectiveness of mammography as a screening tool and its psychological impact. The current study aimed to determine the social, emotional and physical dysfunction caused by the waiting time from the day of scheduling the appointment until the day of screening and explore associated risk factors. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted between March and December 2017 at Khoula Hospital, Muscat, Oman, using a two-part self-administered questionnaire. Part one of the questionnaire collected clinical and demographic data. Part two consisted of the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire (PCQ) and focused on psychological consequences, measuring the effect of mammographic screening on emotional, physical and social functions. Results: A total of 300 women aged ≥40 years old participated in this study (response rate: 100%). Results revealed that there was a minimal negative psychological impact from screening using mammograms. All PCQ domains were significantly impacted for participants who reported a family history of cancer (P = 0.007). The social score was significantly higher among women between 40–50 years old (P = 0.008). Scores of emotional and social functions were significantly affected by participants’ employment status; employed women were more affected than those who were not (P = 0.043 and 0.012, respectively). However, women’s levels of literacy did not affect any of the domains. Conclusion: The psychosocial impact of the waiting period between scheduling and undergoing mammography screening was minimal in the current sample. Future research should evaluate the psychosocial impact on patients at different recall times.Keywords: Breast Cancer; Mammography; Psychological Factors; Depression; Anxiety; Oman

The Seroprevalence of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) in Hemodialysis Patients in Oman: A National Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract Background HCV infection in hemodialysis units is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. The risk of HCV infection among dialysis patients is higher compared to the general population due to high potential blood exposures in hemodialysis settings. This study aims to assess the national HCV seroprevalence in selected dialysis units and to determine the risk factors for acquiring HCV infection. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 January to 31 March 2021. A total of 734 patients from 11 hemodialysis centers in Oman were included. Samples were tested simultaneously for HCV antibodies and HCV RNA. HCV genotyping was determined in all viremic patients. Demographic and hemodialysis center related data were gathered and their association with the positive HCV serology were explored using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results Out of 800 patients selected from 11 dialysis units for the study, 734 patients (91.8%) were included. The overall seroprevalence of HCV infection among hemodialysis patients was 5.6%. (41/734). HCV RNA was detected in 31.7% (13/41) of seropositive hemodialysis patients. The most common genotype was subtype 1a, followed by subtype 3. Variables associated with high HCV prevalence were family history of HCV and duration of dialysis. Conclusion The prevalence of infection within hemodialysis patients in Oman has significantly decreased but remained higher than the general population. Continuous monitoring and follow-up, including periodic serosurvey and linkage to care and treatment are recommended. Additionally, practice audits are recommended for identifying gaps and ensuring sustainability of best practices and further improvement

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study

Background: Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling. Methods: The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty. Results: NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year. Conclusion: As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population

Effects of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery: an international prospective cohort study an international prospective cohort study

We aimed to determine the impact of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We performed an international prospective cohort study including patients undergoing elective surgery in October 2020. Isolation was defined as the period before surgery during which patients did not leave their house or receive visitors from outside their household. The primary outcome was postoperative pulmonary complications, adjusted in multivariable models for measured confounders. Pre-defined sub-group analyses were performed for the primary outcome. A total of 96,454 patients from 114 countries were included and overall, 26,948 (27.9%) patients isolated before surgery. Postoperative pulmonary complications were recorded in 1947 (2.0%) patients of which 227 (11.7%) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients who isolated pre-operatively were older, had more respiratory comorbidities and were more commonly from areas of high SARS-CoV-2 incidence and high-income countries. Although the overall rates of postoperative pulmonary complications were similar in those that isolated and those that did not (2.1% vs 2.0%, respectively), isolation was associated with higher rates of postoperative pulmonary complications after adjustment (adjusted OR 1.20, 95%CI 1.05–1.36, p = 0.005). Sensitivity analyses revealed no further differences when patients were categorised by: pre-operative testing; use of COVID-19-free pathways; or community SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. The rate of postoperative pulmonary complications increased with periods of isolation longer than 3 days, with an OR (95%CI) at 4–7 days or ≥ 8 days of 1.25 (1.04–1.48), p = 0.015 and 1.31 (1.11–1.55), p = 0.001, respectively. Isolation before elective surgery might be associated with a small but clinically important increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Longer periods of isolation showed no reduction in the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. These findings have significant implications for global provision of elective surgical care. We aimed to determine the impact of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We performed an international prospective cohort study including patients undergoing elective surgery in October 2020. Isolation was defined as the period before surgery during which patients did not leave their house or receive visitors from outside their household. The primary outcome was postoperative pulmonary complications, adjusted in multivariable models for measured confounders. Pre-defined sub-group analyses were performed for the primary outcome. A total of 96,454 patients from 114 countries were included and overall, 26,948 (27.9%) patients isolated before surgery. Postoperative pulmonary complications were recorded in 1947 (2.0%) patients of which 227 (11.7%) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients who isolated pre-operatively were older, had more respiratory comorbidities and were more commonly from areas of high SARS-CoV-2 incidence and high-income countries. Although the overall rates of postoperative pulmonary complications were similar in those that isolated and those that did not (2.1% vs 2.0%, respectively), isolation was associated with higher rates of postoperative pulmonary complications after adjustment (adjusted OR 1.20, 95%CI 1.05–1.36, p = 0.005). Sensitivity analyses revealed no further differences when patients were categorised by: pre-operative testing; use of COVID-19-free pathways; or community SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. The rate of postoperative pulmonary complications increased with periods of isolation longer than 3 days, with an OR (95%CI) at 4–7 days or ≥ 8 days of 1.25 (1.04–1.48), p = 0.015 and 1.31 (1.11–1.55), p = 0.001, respectively. Isolation before elective surgery might be associated with a small but clinically important increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Longer periods of isolation showed no reduction in the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. These findings have significant implications for global provision of elective surgical care