Risk Factors Analysis of Herbicide Applicators (Case Study on Palm Oil Plantation PT. S Banyuasin District)

Background: Recently, herbicide used widely in agriculture and plantation areas to controlling weeds. The application of herbicide can have positive effects and negative impacts, if the application is not compliant can pollute the environment and cause health problems to workers. One of the health effects that may result is a decrease in hemoglobin level workers. This study aimed to analyze the risk factors of anemia in oil palm plantations. Methods: The study design was a cross-sectional; with a sample size is a total population of 40 respondents. Data collection were using questionnaires and measurement of hemoglobin level used to Hb meter. Result: The variables that were significantly associated with anemia that respiratory exposure, the use of personal protective equipment and decontamination after spraying, whereas the most dominant variables determine anemia that respiratory exposure and the use of personal protective equipment. Conclusion: Mayority of herbicide applicators experiencing anemia, anemia caused by several variables were respiratory exposure, the use of personal protective equipment, decontamination after spraying. As a result of direct exposure to herbicide causing active ingredients of herbicide absorbed into the body, so it accumulates in the body, and can affect the formation of hemoglobin in the body of workers. Therefore, recommended that the company provide personal protective equipment, special room for decontamination after spraying. In addition, it is necessary to improve knowledge and awareness of workers using personal protective equipment

Multi-institutional report on toxicities of concurrent nivolumab and radiation therapy

Purpose: Radiation therapy (RT) and nivolumab are standard therapies for a wide range of advanced and metastatic cancers, yet little is known about the toxicity profile of their combined treatment. The rate of grade ≥3 toxicities from nivolumab monotherapy and radiation-only palliative treatments has been reported at 10% to 18% and 0% to 26%, respectively. We reviewed our experience to assess the acute toxicity profile of concurrent RT-nivolumab. Methods and materials: A retrospective review of all consecutive patients from January 2015 to May 2017 who received concurrent RT-nivolumab was conducted at 4 separate centers. Concurrent RT-nivolumab was defined as RT completed between 3 days prior to initial nivolumab infusion and 28 days after the last nivolumab infusion. Results: Of the 261 patients who received nivolumab, 46 (17.6%) had concurrent RT to 67 treatment sites. The median follow-up was 3.3 months (interquartile range, 1.7-6.1 months) and the 1-year overall survival rate was 22%. For the 11 of 46 patients (24%) who were alive at last analysis, the median follow-up was 12.8 months (interquartile range, 8.3-14.9 months). The most common histology, RT prescription, and treatment site were non-small cell lung cancer (23 of 46 patients; 50%), 30 Gy in 10 fractions (24 of 67 patients; 35.8%), and abdomen/pelvis (16 of 67 patients; 24%), respectively. Four patients with melanoma had concurrent ipilimumab and were removed from the final toxicity analysis of RT-nivolumab. Within 3 months of treatment with RT-nivolumab, 4 of 42 patients (9.5%) experienced grade 3 toxicity and 2 of these patients’ toxicities were attributed specifically to the addition of RT: grade 3 hearing loss after whole brain RT and grade 3 pancreatitis after stereotactic body RT to the left adrenal gland. One death from transaminitis was attributed to nivolumab alone because the RT field did not encompass the liver. Conclusions: Concurrent RT-nivolumab did not appear to increase the toxicity profile from the previously reported toxicity rates from nivolumab or radiation alone

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Multi-institutional report on toxicities of concurrent nivolumab and radiation therapy

Purpose: Radiation therapy (RT) and nivolumab are standard therapies for a wide range of advanced and metastatic cancers, yet little is known about the toxicity profile of their combined treatment. The rate of grade ≥3 toxicities from nivolumab monotherapy and radiation-only palliative treatments has been reported at 10% to 18% and 0% to 26%, respectively. We reviewed our experience to assess the acute toxicity profile of concurrent RT-nivolumab. Methods and materials: A retrospective review of all consecutive patients from January 2015 to May 2017 who received concurrent RT-nivolumab was conducted at 4 separate centers. Concurrent RT-nivolumab was defined as RT completed between 3 days prior to initial nivolumab infusion and 28 days after the last nivolumab infusion. Results: Of the 261 patients who received nivolumab, 46 (17.6%) had concurrent RT to 67 treatment sites. The median follow-up was 3.3 months (interquartile range, 1.7-6.1 months) and the 1-year overall survival rate was 22%. For the 11 of 46 patients (24%) who were alive at last analysis, the median follow-up was 12.8 months (interquartile range, 8.3-14.9 months). The most common histology, RT prescription, and treatment site were non-small cell lung cancer (23 of 46 patients; 50%), 30 Gy in 10 fractions (24 of 67 patients; 35.8%), and abdomen/pelvis (16 of 67 patients; 24%), respectively. Four patients with melanoma had concurrent ipilimumab and were removed from the final toxicity analysis of RT-nivolumab. Within 3 months of treatment with RT-nivolumab, 4 of 42 patients (9.5%) experienced grade 3 toxicity and 2 of these patients' toxicities were attributed specifically to the addition of RT: grade 3 hearing loss after whole brain RT and grade 3 pancreatitis after stereotactic body RT to the left adrenal gland. One death from transaminitis was attributed to nivolumab alone because the RT field did not encompass the liver. Conclusions: Concurrent RT-nivolumab did not appear to increase the toxicity profile from the previously reported toxicity rates from nivolumab or radiation alone

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licenseBackground: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit

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