ABSTRACT
Background@#Attitudes towards smoking, lung cancer screening, and perceived risk of lung cancer have not been widely studied in Malaysia. The primary objective of this study was to describe the factors affecting the willingness of high-risk current smokers and ex-smokers to undergo low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer. @*Methods@#A prospective, cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted in current smokers or ex-smokers aged between 55 and 80 years at three hospitals in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. The questionnaire recorded the following parameters: perceived lung cancer risk; Prostate Lung Colon Ovarian Cancer 2012 risk prediction model excluding race and ethnicity predictor (PLCOm2012norace); demographic characteristics; psychosocial characteristics; and attitudes towards lung cancer and lung cancer screening. @*Results@#A vast majority of the 95 respondents (94.7%) indicated their willingness to undergo screening. Stigma of lung cancer, low levels of knowledge about lung cancer symptoms, concerns about financial constraints, and a preference for traditional medication were still prevalent among the respondents, and they may represent potential barriers to lung cancer screening uptake. A desire to have an early diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 11.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53 to 84.05; p=0.02), perceived time constraints (OR, 3.94; 95% CI, 1.32 to 11.73; p=0.01), and proximity of LDCT screening facilities (OR, 14.33; 95% CI, 1.84 to 111.4; p=0.01) had significantly higher odds of willingness to undergo screening. @*Conclusion@#Although high-risk current smokers and ex-smokers are likely to undergo screening for lung cancer, several psychosocial barriers persist. The results of this study may guide the policymakers and clinicians regarding the need to improve lung cancer awareness in our population.
ABSTRACT
@#Healthcare workers typically work in shift to ensure smooth operation of healthcare industries around the clock. However, working in shift put them at risk of developing occupational fatigue and sleepiness during and after work, with multiple adverse effects to themselves and patients under their care. This review aims to identify available evidence-based intervention for fatigue and sleepiness among healthcare workers working in shift. We searched PubMed, Scopus and CENTRAL database from January 2013 to December 2017. Selection criteria included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effect of any interventions on fatigue and/or sleepiness among shift workers. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts for relevant studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We included 8 relevant trials with 7 review-relevant participants. Given the methodological diversity of the included studies in terms of interventions and assessment tools, it is not possible to determine the effectiveness of these interventions to reduce occupational fatigue or sleepiness among healthcare workers working in shift. More good quality RCTs with comparable assessment tools is needed.