Preparedness of pre-intern medical graduates of three universities in Sri Lanka to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Early recognition and the optimal management of anaphylaxis saves lives but studies from different countries have demonstrated gaps in knowledge and practices between healthcare workers. There is a paucity of such data from Sri Lanka. We assessed knowledge, perception and self-confidence in the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis amongst pre-intern medical graduates who would soon become first-contact doctors attending emergencies. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included pre-interns who graduated with Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) degrees in 2019 from three Sri Lankan universities with differing undergraduate curricula. Using consecutive sampling data were collected within four months of the final-MBBS examinations with a self-administered questionnaire and the answers on case diagnosis and management were used as the basis of outcome scores. RESULTS: 385 participants responded (response rate: 91.5%). 16.4% correctly identified all anaphylaxis triggers. Only 7.3% correctly diagnosed all ten case scenarios and 34.5% all seven cases of anaphylaxis. 98.2 and 97.9% correctly identified 1:1000 adrenaline as the first-line treatment and the intramuscular route. 9.9% would preferentially but incorrectly use the intravenous route if access was available. Only 79.2 and 55.6% knew the correct adult and paediatric doses of adrenaline and 50% agreed that follow-up care was needed. The mean scores for case diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis were 7.7/10 ± 1.4 and 16.9/20 ± 1.9, respectively. Multiple linear regression indicated that the final MBBS results classification (class of degree or no class indicated) was a positive predictor of case diagnosis score [class vs no class: B = 0.662 (95% CI 0.347-0.978), p < 0.001] and being a graduate of University 2 [B = 1.568 (95% CI 1.182-1.953), p < 0.001] and passing with a class at final MBBS [B = 0.716 (95% CI 0.319-1.113), p < 0.001] were positive predictors of management score. Self confidence in diagnosing and managing anaphylaxis were rated as 79.7 and 62.1% and there was a positive correlation between knowledge and perception scores and self-confidence (case-diagnosis: rpb = 0.111, p = 0.03; management: rpb = 0.164, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge, perception and self confidence in the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis was sub optimal amongst pre-interns and we identified areas that need improvement. A higher MBBS qualification classification was a predictor for correct diagnosis and management and confidence in diagnosis and management positively correlated with knowledge and perception scores. Further and enhanced educational and training strategies are needed for this life threatening emergency condition.

Interventions for treatment and/or prevention of alcohol hangover: Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate new research conducted over the past few years (2009-2016) assessing the effectiveness of potentially curative and/or preventive methods of alcohol hangover. METHODS: Data were retrieved by a 4-stage systematic search process. A search of the online Pubmed and Scopus databases were performed, using a combination of keywords: "Alcohol," "Ethanol," and "C2 H5 OH," in combination with the terms "Hangover," "Treatment," and "Prevention." The search comprised studies listed between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2016. Findings were synthesized using a systematic approach. Quantitative analysis was not done because of the heterogeneity of the included studies. RESULTS: Six controlled human studies were identified (placebo controlled-3, controlled studies with a comparator intervention-3). Of the interventions, the use of polysaccharide rich extract of Acanthopanax senticosus, red ginseng antihangover drink, Korean pear juice, KSS formula, and the After-Effect© were associated with a significant improvement of hangover symptoms (p < .05). The highest improvement was observed for the following symptoms: tiredness, nausea/vomiting, and stomachache. None of the methods were effective for all the symptoms. CONCLUSION: The available evidence suggests that several products are capable of significantly improving some, but not all, of the symptoms related to alcohol hangover. Therefore, further research is necessary to develop clinically effective hangover treatments.