The efficiency of a mixed exercise program on quality of life and fatigue levels in patients with breast cancer

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: Exercise is a nonpharmacological supportive therapy which has been specifically identified to reduce postoperative complications or adverse events of cancer or treatments. Although there are few studies combining resistance and aerobic exercise in cancer survivors, exercise programs are very rare in different places in the literature. This study aims to investigate the effects of mixed-type exercise in different venues on weight, body mass index, fatigue, and quality of life in cancer survivors. METHODS: This is a descriptive, intervention study. Participants were included in the study, and the exercise process was between January and November 2019. The exercise group consisted of 32 patients who had just completed their breast cancer treatment and did not have distant metastases, and they applied a mixed exercise program including resistance at home and aerobic exercise in the fitness center for 12 weeks. The patients with breast cancer in the control group (30 patients) did not receive any exercise program. RESULTS: Subjective feelings of fatigue and decrease in concentration, motivation, and physical activity significantly decreased after exercise (p<0.001, p<0.001, p=0.006, p=0.008, and p<0.001, respectively) in the study group. The results also showed that physical health, general health status, and emotional and social health status significantly increased with the exercise program (p<0.001, p<0.001, p=0.004, and p=0.003, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our results show that a mixed (fitness center and home) 12-week exercise program provides an improvement in general health and reduces the side effects of the treatments and fatigue in patients with breast cancer. For a good prognostic process after medical treatment, exercise can be recommended in every accessible area.

Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19

SUMMARY BACKGROUND Healthcare personnel are at risk of becoming infected while taking upper and/or lower respiratory tract specimens. Therefore, there is a need for sampling methods that do not risk infecting them. In this study, we aimed to compare the saliva and Oro-Nasopharyngeal Swab (ONS) sampling methods. METHODS Patients were divided into three groups. Group 1 included patients whose diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Group 2 included patients with COVID-19 compatible findings in lung computed tomography (CT), but with a negative PCR. Group 3 included patients who presented to the emergency department with COVID-19 compatible complaints but had normal CT. Saliva and ONS samples were taken on the third day of hospitalization in groups 1 and 2, whereas in group 3, they were taken at the time of admission to the hospital. RESULTS A total of 64 patients were included in the study. The average age was 51.04 ± 17.9 years, and 37 (57.8%) were male. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 27 (42.2%) patients' saliva samples. While the sensitivity and positive predictive value of saliva samples were 85.2%, specificity and negative predictive value were 89.2%. The value of kappa was in substantial agreement (0.744), and it was found statistically significant (<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Saliva samples can be used instead of ONS samples in detecting SARS-CoV-2. Investigating SARS-CoV-2 with saliva is cheaper, easier for the patient and overall, and, most importantly, it poses much less risk of SARS-CoV-2 contamination to healthcare personnel.

RESUMO OBJETIVO Funcionários da saúde correm risco de infecção ao coletar amostras do trato superior e/ou inferior. Portanto, existe a necessidade de métodos de coleta de amostras que não representem um risco de infecção. Neste estudo, nosso objetivo foi comparar as métodos de coleta de saliva e swab de naso e orofaringe (ONS). MÉTODOS Os pacientes foram divididos em três grupos. O Grupo 1 incluiu pacientes cujo diagnóstico de COVID-19 foi confirmado por reação em cadeia da polimerase (PCR). O Grupo 2 incluiu pacientes com achados compatíveis com COVID-19 em exames de tomografia computadorizada (TC), mas com PCR negativo. O Grupo 3 incluiu pacientes que compareceram ao departamento de emergência com queixas compatíveis com COVID-19, mas TC normal. Amostras de saliva e ONS foram coletadas no terceiro dia de internação, nos Grupos 1 e 2, já no Grupo 3, foram coletadas no momento da internação. RESULTADOS Um total de 64 pacientes foram incluídos no estudo. A média de idade foi de 51,04 ± 17,9 anos, e 37 (57,8%) eram do sexo masculino. SARS-CoV-2 foi detectado em 27 (42,2%) amostras de saliva dos pacientes. A sensibilidade e valor preditivo positivo foi de 85,2% nas amostras de saliva, já a especificidade e o valor preditivo negativo foi 89,2%. O valor de Kappa estava substancialmente de acordo (0,744) e era estatisticamente significante (<0,001). CONCLUSÃO Amostras de saliva podem ser usada em vez de ONS na detecção de SARS-CoV-2. O uso de amostras de saliva para detecção de SARS-CoV-2 é mais barato, mais fácil para o paciente e em geral e, mais importante, representa um risco muito menor de contaminação de SARS-CoV-2 para os profissionais da saúde.