RESUMEN
Objective@#To explore school bullying in middle school and the associated socio-ecological factors.@*Methods@#Totally 1 169 middle school students were selected from urban areas of Nantong and were selected to complete the Campus Bullying Questionnaire and a self-designed questionnaire.@*Results@#The bullying scores of junior school students were higher than senior school students( t=3.61, 2.53, P <0.05). The bullying scores of ordinary middle school students were higher than the key middle school students( t=12.52, 8.34, P <0.01). The bullying scores of students with poor peer relationship were higher than the students with good peer relationship( F=8.98, 25.89, P <0.01). The bullying scores of students with poor school discipline were higher than the students with good school discipline （F=8.50, 10.00, P <0.01). Students from schools with poor school bullying prevention and control policies reported higher rates of campus bullying than students from schools with general and perfect school policies( F= 8.30 , 2.67, P <0.05). The bullying scores of intervention type and neglect type students were higher than the negotiation type students( F=3.66, P <0.05). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that high school section, key middle school, good peer relationship, deliberative education mode, good school style and discipline, and improvement of campus bullying prevention and control policies were the protective factors that affect middle school students’ Campus bullying( OR=1.68-4.28, P <0.05), gender and only child were risk factors for chool bullying( OR=1.54, 1.68, P <0.05). Structural equation model analysis showed that the path of campus bullying was centered on individual factors, through interaction with interpersonal, organizational and policy factors.@*Conclusion@#Campus bullying prevention and intervention should be considered from individual, interpersonal, organizational and policy levels of students, through the collaborative efforts of school, family and society.
RESUMEN
Objective This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and complications between the retropubic and transobturator approaches for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) by conducting a systematic review. Materials and Methods We selected all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared retropubic and transobturator sling placements for treatment of SUI. We estimated pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and complications. Results Six hundred twelve studies that compared retropubic and transobturator approaches to midurethral sling placement were identified, of which 16 were included in our research. Our study was based on results from 2646 women. We performed a subgroup analysis to compare outcomes and complications between the two approaches. The evidence to support the superior approach that leads to better objective/subjective cure rate was insufficient. The transobturator approach was associated with lower risks of bladder perforation (odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09-0.32), retropubic/vaginal hematoma (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.63), and long-term voiding dysfunction (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.17-0.61). However, the risk of thigh/groin pain seemed higher in the transobturator group (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.72-3.72). We found no statistically significant differences in the risks of other complications between the two approaches. Conclusions This meta-analysis shows analogical objective and subjective cure rates between the retropubic and transobturator approaches to midurethral sling placement. The transobturator approach was associated with lower risks of several complications. However, good-quality studies with long-term follow-ups are warranted for further research. .