Socio-demographic correlates of treatment response among patients with schizophrenia in a tertiary hospital in South-East Nigeria.

Background: Many patients with schizophrenia respond poorly to antipsychotic medication. Few studies have systematically examined the relationship of social and demographic characteristics of these patients to treatment response in our environment. Objective: To identify the social and demographic variables associated with treatment response in patients with schizophrenia. Method: A total of 172 participants with a diagnosis of schizophrenia receiving antipsychotics took part in the study. Participants were consecutively recruited involving patients presenting for the first time, or relapsed patients who had stopped antipsychotics in the previous six months. Both in-patients and out-patients who met the inclusion criteria were studied. Socio-demographic interview schedule and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) were administered at the initial encounter and between 4 and 6 weeks, subsequently. Results: Defining good treatment response as 65 20% reduction in PANSS score, 68% had a good response while 32% had poor response. Good response to treatment was associated with late age of onset of illness, satisfactory family relationship, acquisition of skilled occupation and being married. However, there was no association between treatment response and gender. Conclusion: Knowledge about these variables in relation to treatment response would improve mental health services as regards articulation of prognosis and psycho education

Relationship between religiosity, religious coping and socio-demographic variables among out-patients with depression or diabetes mellitus in Enugu, Nigeria.

Background: Religion is a powerful coping strategy. Diabetes and depression are common conditions in our environment that induce psychological distress, thus requiring coping for better outcome. Studies indicate that increased religiosity is associated with better outcome in clinical and general populations. Therefore, studies of the distribution of religiosity and religious coping among these populations are essential to improve outcome. Objectives: To assess the association between religiosity, religious coping in depression and diabetes mellitus, and selected sociodemographic variables (age, gender and occupational status). Methods:Using simple random sampling we recruited 112 participants with diabetes and an equal number with depression consecutively, matching for gender. Religiosity was determined using religious orientation scale (revised), religious coping with brief religious coping scale and socio-demographic variables with a socio-demographic questionnaire. Results: Intrinsic religiosity was greater among older people with depression than among older people with diabetes(t=5.02,p<0.001); no significant difference among young people with depression and diabetes(t=1.47,p=0.15).Positive religious coping was greater among older people with depression than among older people with diabetes(t=2.31,p=0.02); no difference among young people with depression and diabetes(t=0.80,p=0.43). Females with depression had higher intrinsic religiosity scores than males with depression(t=3.85,p<0.001); no difference in intrinsic religiosity between females and males with diabetes(t=0.99,p=0.32).Positive religious coping was greater among participants with diabetes in the low occupational status(t=2.96,p<0.001) than those in the high occupational status. Conclusion: Religion is indeed a reliable coping method, most commonly used by the elderly and females with depression. Positive religious coping is more common among diabetic patients who are in the low occupational status

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background: Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods: This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was coprioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low-middle-income countries. Results: In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of 'single-use' consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low-middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion: This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high- and low-middle-income countries

BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020 and global surgical practice was compromised. This Commission aimed to document and reflect on the changes seen in the surgical environment during the pandemic, by reviewing colleagues experiences and published evidence. Methods: In late 2020, BJS contacted colleagues across the global surgical community and asked them to describe how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had affected their practice. In addition to this, the Commission undertook a literature review on the impact of COVID-19 on surgery and perioperative care. A thematic analysis was performed to identify the issues most frequently encountered by the correspondents, as well as the solutions and ideas suggested to address them. Results: BJS received communications for this Commission from leading clinicians and academics across a variety of surgical specialties in every inhabited continent. The responses from all over the world provided insights into multiple facets of surgical practice from a governmental level to individual clinical practice and training. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has uncovered a variety of problems in healthcare systems, including negative impacts on surgical practice. Global surgical multidisciplinary teams are working collaboratively to address research questions about the future of surgery in the post-COVID-19 era. The COVID-19 pandemic is severely damaging surgical training. The establishment of a multidisciplinary ethics committee should be encouraged at all surgical oncology centres. Innovative leadership and collaboration is vital in the post-COVID-19 era

BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020 and global surgical practice was compromised. This Commission aimed to document and reflect on the changes seen in the surgical environment during the pandemic, by reviewing colleagues' experiences and published evidence