Advancing Cardio-Oncology in Asia

Cardio-oncology is an emerging multi-disciplinary field, which aims to reduce morbidity and mortality of cancer patients by preventing and managing cancer treatment-related cardiovascular toxicities. With the exponential growth in cancer and cardiovascular diseases in Asia, there is an emerging need for cardio-oncology awareness among physicians and country-specific cardio-oncology initiatives. In this state-of-the-art review, we sought to describe the burden of cancer and cardiovascular disease in Asia, a region with rich cultural and socio-economic diversity. From describing the uniqueness and challenges (such as socio-economic disparity, ethnical and racial diversity, and limited training opportunities) in establishing cardio-oncology in Asia, and outlining ways to overcome any barriers, this article aims to help advance the field of cardio-oncology in Asia.

Successful extracorporeal liver dialysis for the treatment of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole-induced fulminant hepatic failure

Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMZ) is a commonly used antibiotic that has been associated with drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome. DRESS syndrome is characterised by fever, rash, lymphadenopathy, eosinophilia and one or more major organ involvement. Although rare, TMP-SMZ is a recognised cause of fulminant hepatic failure. We report a 17-year-old Chinese male adolescent who presented with fever, myalgia, generalised maculopapular rash and lymphadenopathy after taking TMP-SMZ for acne vulgaris. He subsequently developed hepatic encephalopathy and was worked up for urgent liver transplantation. He responded well to extracorporeal liver dialysis (originally intended as a bridging therapy) and subsequently recovered without the need for liver transplantation. This case report highlights the importance of early recognition of TMP-SMZ-induced DRESS syndrome and the need for early discontinuation of the drug in the affected patient. Extracorporeal liver dialysis and transplantation should be considered in the management of TMP-SMZ-induced fulminant hepatic failure.

Public trust in primary care doctors, the medical profession and the healthcare system among Redhill residents in Singapore

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>There have been few studies on public trust in doctors and healthcare systems and this is the first in Singapore.</p><p><b>MATERIALS AND METHODS</b>A cross-sectional survey was carried out in Redhill in January 2005. Citizens or Permanent Residents aged > or =18 years were randomly selected, one per household to avoid cluster bias, and 361 participated (response rate 68.7%). An interview administered questionnaire included 3 questionnaires measuring public trust: "Interpersonal Trust in Physicians Scale" for primary care doctors; "Trust in Physicians Generally Scale" for the medical profession; and "Trust in Healthcare System Scale" for the Healthcare System. Questions were answered on a Likert scale: 1. Strongly Disagree, 2. Disagree, 3. Neutral, 4. Agree, 5. Strongly Agree. Individual transformed scores of trust (range, 0 to 100) were equally divided into 5 categories with their average being the transformed mean.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Trust in primary care doctors (mean 59.7) had proportions (prevalence rates) of: very low 0.3%, low 2.5%, neutral 40.4%, high 54.0%, and very high 2.8%. Trust in the medical profession (mean 61.8) had proportions of: very low 1.0%, low 7.7%, neutral 33.7%, high 47.0%, and very high 10.5%. Trust in the healthcare system (mean 61.5) had proportions of: very low 0.5%, low 4.1%, neutral 40.0%, high 48.7%, and very high 6.7%. For areas of the healthcare system, proportions of high/very high trust were: "Healthcare Providers' Expertise" (70.8%), "Quality of Care" (61.5%), "Patient Focus of Providers" (58.7%), "Information Supply and Communication by Care Providers" (52.3%), "Quality of Cooperation" (43.3%), and Policies of the Healthcare System" (24.6%).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>While low proportions had low/very low trust, the high proportions with neutral trust and the rather low level of trust in "Policies of the Healthcare System" are causes for concern.</p>