Role of fibreoptic bronchoscopy in haemoptysis: an analysis of 157 patients

Background: Objectives of this study were to define the role of fibreoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) in determining the etiology of haemoptysis, to determine whether bronchoscopy is useful in haemoptysis with normal chest x-ray, to determine whether early bronchoscopy is better than delayed bronchoscopy.Methods: This prospective study was conducted on 157 patients who presented with hemoptysis to the Department of Tuberculosis and Chest diseases. All these patients underwent FOB after taking proper history and examination and ruling out any contraindication to the procedure.Results: In patients with haemoptysis with normal CXR, a diagnosis was established in 54.5% by FOB while 38.6% had a normal bronchoscopy. An endoscopic diagnosis of bronchitis was made in 22.7% patients. In only 9.1% patients an endobronchial mass was seen on bronchoscopy, and all of them were more than 40 years of age. Active bleeding/bleeding site was localized in 18.1% patients. In patients with abnormal chest roentgenogram who underwent FOB, a definitive diagnosis was established in 75.4% cases with active bleeding/ bleeding site localized in 59.6%. Thirty five percent were having an endobronchial mass. Of all the patients who underwent FOB for recurrent haemoptysis, active bleeding/bleeding site was localized in 48.4% patients. Bleeding site was localized in 62.9% patients who underwent early FOB, while the yield was lower (29.4%) in patients who underwent delayed FOB.Conclusions: Fibreoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) is an important and useful investigation in patients of haemoptysis in determining the bleeding site and etiology of haemoptysis. Early FOB has higher yield in localizing the bleeding site than delayed FOB.

Stigma in coronavirus disease-19 survivors in Kashmir, India: A cross-sectional exploratory study.

BackgroundCoronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has not only spawned a lot of stigma and discrimination towards its survivors but also to their corpses. We aimed to assess the magnitude and correlates of stigma in these survivors, on return to their communities.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional, hospital-based, exploratory study conducted by the postgraduate department of psychiatry, in collaboration with the postgraduate department of chest medicine, Govt. medical college, Srinagar. The study was performed among COVID-19 survivors, who attended the outpatient department after their discharge from the hospital. Socio-demographic characteristics were recorded through semi-structured proforma. Stigma was measured by the stigma questionnaire. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression analysis.ResultsA total of 91 survivors consented to participate in the study. Almost half (46.2%) of them were in the age group of 30-49 years and close to two-thirds (68.1%) were males. About three-fourths (74.7%) were from the urban background. The mean time from hospital discharge to study entry was 11.7±5.1 [Range(R) = 7-21] days. 98% of survivors provided at least one stigma endorsing response and the total mean stigma score was 28.5±7.1[R = 6-39]. The mean stigma sub-scores were highest for enacted stigma (7.6±1.8) [R = 2-9] and externalized stigma (15.0±4.1) [R = 1-20]. Enacted stigma was significantly high in males as compared to females. Enacted stigma and internalized stigma were both associated with education. Enacted stigma, externalized stigma, disclosure concerns, and total stigma was significantly associated with the occupation. Being unemployed and time since discharge were identified as independent predictors of total stigma.ConclusionOur study results showed high levels of enacted and externalized stigma among COVID-19 survivors. Enacted stigma was more among males and in those who were highly educated. Survivor centered and community-driven anti-stigma programs are the need of the hour to promote the recovery and community re-integration of these survivors

Correction: Stigma in coronavirus disease-19 survivors in Kashmir, India: A cross-sectional exploratory study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240152.]