Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Diabetes Metab Syndr ; 15(4): 102167, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1263248

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to challenge us. Despite several strides in management, steroids remain the mainstay for treating moderate to severe disease and with it arises challenges such as hyperglycemia. The review aims to enhance awareness amongst physicians on steroid use and hyperglycemia. METHODS: An advisory document describing various strategies for hyperglycemia management was prepared in the public interest by DiabetesIndia. RESULTS: The review provides awareness on steroids and hyperglycemia, adverse outcomes of elevated blood glucose levels and, advice at the time of discharge. CONCLUSIONS: The article emphasizes enhancing awareness on effective management of hyperglycemia during COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Steroids/therapeutic use , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Hyperglycemia/virology
2.
World J Clin Oncol ; 12(2): 54-60, 2021 Feb 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1121730

ABSTRACT

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains one of the deadliest malignancies affecting the older population. We are experiencing a paradigm shift in the treatment of pancreatic cancer in the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Utilizing neoadjuvant treatment and further conducting a safe surgery while protecting patients in a controlled environment can improve oncological outcomes. On the other hand, an optimal oncologic procedure performed in a hazardous setting could shorten patient survival if recovery is complicated by COVID-19 infection. We believe that oncological treatment protocols must adapt to this new health threat, and pancreatic cancer is not unique in this regard. Although survival may not be as optimistic as most other malignancies, as caregivers and researchers, we are committed to innovating and reshaping the treatment algorithms to minimize morbidity and maximize survival as caregivers and researchers.

3.
Am J Surg ; 222(1): 99-103, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-917204

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID crisis hit during the interview season for the Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowship. With minimal time to adapt, all programs transitioned to virtual interviews. Here we describe the experience of both program directors (PDs) and candidates with virtual interviews, and provide guidelines for implementation based on the results. METHODS: Surveys regarding interview day specifics and perceptions were created for CGSO fellowship PDs and candidates. They were distributed at the conclusion of the season, prior to match. RESULTS: Thirty (94%) PDs and 64 (79%) candidates responded. Eighty-three% of PDs and 79% of candidates agreed or strongly agreed that they felt comfortable creating a rank list. If given the choice, 60% of PDs and 45% of candidates would choose virtual interviews over in-person interviews. The majority of candidates found PD overviews, fellows only sessions and pre-interview materials helpful. CONCLUSION: Overall, the majority of PDs and candidates felt comfortable creating a rank list; however, more PDs preferred virtual interviews for the future. Our results also confirm key components of a virtual interview day.


Subject(s)
Internship and Residency/organization & administration , Personal Satisfaction , Personnel Selection/methods , Surgical Oncology/education , Telecommunications/organization & administration , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Female , Humans , Internship and Residency/methods , Internship and Residency/statistics & numerical data , Male , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personnel Selection/organization & administration , Personnel Selection/standards , Personnel Selection/statistics & numerical data , Surgeons/psychology , Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , Surgical Oncology/organization & administration , Surgical Oncology/standards , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Telecommunications/standards , Telecommunications/statistics & numerical data
4.
BMJ Glob Health ; 5(7)2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-648888

ABSTRACT

Are the steps that have been taken to arrest the spread of COVID-19 justifiable? Specifically, are they likely to have improved public health understood according to widely used aggregate population health measures, such as Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) as much or more than alternatives? This is a reasonable question, since such measures have been promoted extensively in global and national health policy by influential actors, and they have become almost synonymous with quantification of public health. If the steps taken against COVID-19 did not meet this test, then either the measures or the policies must be re-evaluated. There are indications that policies against COVID-19 may have been unbalanced and therefore not optimal. A balanced approach to protecting population health should be proportionate in its effects across distinct health concerns at a moment, across populations over time and across populations over space. These criteria provide a guide to designing and implementing policies that diminish harm from COVID-19 while also providing due attention to other threats to aggregate population health. They should shape future policies in response to this pandemic and others.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/economics , Global Health , Pandemics/economics , Pandemics/ethics , Pneumonia, Viral/economics , Population Health , Public Health/economics , Public Health/ethics , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Policy , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL