ABSTRACT
Background Knowledge sharing is a process by which information is exchanged between peers, colleagues, or, at a higher level, between institutions and organizations. This study aimed to assess the barriers to knowledge sharing among medical students at private and public-sector medical colleges in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methodology An online questionnaire was used to collect data from four medical colleges. Students were selected by non-probability convenience sampling. The English-language questionnaire included 12 questions related to knowledge sharing based on a Likert scale of one to five, with one denoting strongly disagreeing and five strongly agreeing. Out of the 520 questionnaires, 497 (96%) were received and analyzed using SPSS version 23 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results A total of 497 respondents completed our questionnaire. Most were males (67.8%). Our results revealed that statements such as "afraid to provide the wrong information," "people only share with those who share with them," and "too busy/lack of time" were the most perceived barriers to knowledge sharing (mean = 3.95, 3.61, and 3.60, respectively). Furthermore, female opinions on statements such as "lack of relationship," "afraid to provide the wrong information," "do not know what to share," and "shyness to provide own opinions" were more dominant than male opinions. This difference was found to be statistically significant (p-values = 0.007, 0.020, 0.002, and 0.009, respectively). Conclusions Our study indicated that barriers such as "afraid to provide the wrong information" and "people only share with those who share with them" are important barriers that hinder the process of knowledge sharing. Moreover, most students agreed that "too busy/lack of time" and "lack of relationship" are barriers to knowledge sharing. In addition, statements such as "lack of relationship," "afraid to provide the wrong information," "do not know what to share," and "shyness to provide own opinions" were acknowledged as barriers by female students more than male students. There is a need in the curriculum to structure various types of activities that inspire and promote knowledge exchange among students. Further research is needed to validate our findings.
ABSTRACT
A 32-year-old male was brought to our emergency department following trauma due to fall of heavy object (tree) on his back. After Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) protocol implementation, the patient was noted to have a complete perianal tear and loss of power in L3-S1 measuring 1/5 complete loss of sensation below the level of L2. Imaging showed spinopelvic dissociation with cauda equina syndrome. Spinopelvic fixation and fusion with rigid fixation done. The patient regained normal function following extensive physiotherapy. This paper concludes that good and prompt surgical intervention facilitated neurological recovery following decompression.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most common general surgical procedures. It has been performed under local, regional, or general anesthesia. We hypothesized that using regional plus general anesthesia rather than general anesthesia alone would improve outcomes in neonates and pediatric patients undergoing hernia repair. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study, including all pediatric patients who underwent inguinal hernia repair from 2015-2021. We divided patients into two groups. The first group was labeled "general anesthesia" (GA), while the second group was labeled "combined general and regional anesthesia" (GA+RA). We compared both groups in terms of demographic data, intraoperative outcome variables, and postoperative outcome variables. RESULTS: 212 children fulfilled the study criteria, with 57 in the GA group and 155 in the GA+RA group. Demographic and preoperative data were comparable between both groups except for age, which was 60.3±49.4 months in the GA group versus 26.7±33.13 months in the GA+RA group (p<.0001). Outcome variables demonstrated statistically significant improvement in postoperative pain occurrence, length of hospital stay, incidence of bradycardia, and need for mechanical ventilation in the GA+RA group in comparison to the GA group with P values of 0.031, 0.02, 0.005, and 0.02, respectively. CONCLUSION: Using regional and general anesthesia techniques rather than general anesthesia alone is associated with a decrease in postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, incidence of bradycardia, and need for mechanical ventilation. Further studies are still warranted to validate our conclusions.
