ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: YouTube has educational videos on inhalers. However, their content and quality are not adequately known. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the quality and content of educational YouTube videos on inhalers. METHODS: This descriptive study analyzed 178 YouTube videos on inhalers between May and July 2022. Two researchers independently evaluated the videos. The Global Quality Score (GQS), Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark Criteria, and Inhaler Application Checklist (IAC) were used to assess the quality and content of the videos. Spearman's correlation, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, ANOVA, and Post hoc analysis Bonferroni test were used for data analysis. RESULTS: The videos had a mean GQS score of 3.70 ± 1.24, and JAMA score of 2.22 ± 0.60. A negative correlation was between the quality score of the videos and views, likes, comments, duration, and likes/views (respectively; r = -0.237 p < 0.005, r = -0.217 p < 0.003, r = -0.220 p < 0.005, r = -0.147, p < 0.005). The videos narrated by nurses and doctors had significantly higher mean JAMA and GQS scores than others (p = 0.001). The videos missed some procedural steps [gargling (29.1%), adding no more than five ml of medication and device cleaning (41.9%), and exhaling through the nose (37.5%)]. Videos uploaded by individual missed significantly more procedural steps than professional organizations (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: YouTube videos about inhaler techniques have a moderate level of quality. Videos uploaded by doctors and nurses as content narrators were of higher quality. The videos missed some procedural steps. Individual video uploaders had higher missed procedural steps. Counseling should be provided to patients regarding the reliability of online information.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To identify effects of various nationwide vaccination protocols on the evolution of new SARS-CoV-2 infections among adult population and to evaluate the safety of mRNA (BioNTech/ Pfizer) vaccine. Methods: Totally 10 735 adult volunteers that received at least one dose of BioNTech/Pfizer or triple doses of CoronaVac participated in this cross-sectional-online survey between 1 and 10 September 2021. The information was collected covering a 5-month period from April 2021 to September 2021. Information about people who were vaccinated with only single and double dose CoronaVac were not included in this study. Results: At least one side effect after single and double dose of BioNTech/Pfizer and triple doses of CoronaVac were observed in 42.1%, 42.5% and 10.9%, respectively. The most common side effects were shoulder/arm pain, weakness/fatigue, muscle/joint pain and headache. The side effects were the most frequent in single BioNTech/Pfizer, while it was the least in triple CoronaVac. The rate of positive PCR tests before vaccination was 17.6%, and decreased to 3.0% after vaccination. The rates of positive SARS CoV-2-PCR were 18.8%, 3.5%, 3.1%, 0.5% and 4.6% in single BioNTech/Pfizer, double BioNTech/Pfizer, double CoronaVac+single BioNTech/Pfizer, double CoronaVac+double BioNTech/Pfizer and triple CoronaVac, respectively. While 1.8% of PCR positive COVID-19 cases needed intensive unit care in the pre-vaccination period, intensive care unit was required in 0%, 1.5%, 2.4%, 0% and 4.2% after single BioNTech/ Pfizer, double BioNTech/Pfizer, double CoronaVac+single BioNTech/ Pfizer, double CoronaVac+double BioNTech/Pfizer and triple CoronaVac, respectively. Reinfection rate after vaccination was 0.4%. Conclusions: The rarity of COVID-19 infection after vaccination suggests that efficacy of vaccines is maintained. On the other hand, the data underscore the critical importance of continued public health mitigation.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To evaluate long-term effects of COVID-19, and to determine the risk factors in long-COVID in a cohort of the Turkish Thoracic Society (TTS)-TURCOVID multicenter registry. Methods: Thirteen centers participated with 831 patients; 504 patients were enrolled after exclusions. The study was designed in three-steps: (1) Phone questionnaire; (2) retrospective evaluation of the medical records; (3) face-to-face visit. Results: In the first step, 93.5% of the patients were hospitalized; 61.7% had a history of pneumonia at the time of diagnosis. A total of 27.1% reported clinical symptoms at the end of the first year. Dyspnea (17.00%), fatigue (6.30%), and weakness (5.00%) were the most prevalent long-term symptoms. The incidence of long-term symptoms was increased by 2.91 fold (95% CI 1.04-8.13, P=0.041) in the presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and by 1.84 fold (95% CI 1.10-3.10, P=0.021) in the presence of pneumonia at initial diagnosis, 3.92 fold (95% Cl 2.29-6.72, P=0.001) of dyspnea and 1.69 fold (95% Cl 1.02-2.80, P=0.040) fatigue persists in the early-post-treatment period and 2.88 fold (95% Cl 1.52-5.46, P=0.001) in the presence of emergency service admission in the post COVID period. In step 2, retrospective analysis of 231 patients revealed that 1.4% of the chest X-rays had not significantly improved at the end of the first year, while computed tomography (CT) scan detected fibrosis in 3.4%. In step 3, 138 (27.4%) patients admitted to face-to-face visit at the end of first year; at least one symptom persisted in 49.27% patients. The most common symptoms were dyspnea (27.60%), psychiatric symptoms (18.10%), and fatigue (17.40%). Thorax CT revealed fibrosis in 2.4% patients. Conclusions: COVID-19 symptoms can last for extended lengths of time, and severity of the disease as well as the presence of comorbidities might contribute to increased risk. Long-term clinical issues should be regularly evaluated after COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To identify effects of various nationwide vaccination protocols on the evolution of new SARS-CoV-2 infections among adult population and to evaluate the safety of mRNA (BioNTech/ Pfizer) vaccine. Methods: Totally 10 735 adult volunteers that received at least one dose of BioNTech/Pfizer or triple doses of CoronaVac participated in this cross-sectional-online survey between 1 and 10 September 2021. The information was collected covering a 5-month period from April 2021 to September 2021. Information about people who were vaccinated with only single and double dose CoronaVac were not included in this study. Results: At least one side effect after single and double dose of BioNTech/Pfizer and triple doses of CoronaVac were observed in 42.1%, 42.5% and 10.9%, respectively. The most common side effects were shoulder/arm pain, weakness/fatigue, muscle/joint pain and headache. The side effects were the most frequent in single BioNTech/Pfizer, while it was the least in triple CoronaVac. The rate of positive PCR tests before vaccination was 17.6%, and decreased to 3.0% after vaccination. The rates of positive SARS CoV-2-PCR were 18.8%, 3.5%, 3.1%, 0.5% and 4.6% in single BioNTech/Pfizer, double BioNTech/Pfizer, double CoronaVac+single BioNTech/Pfizer, double CoronaVac+double BioNTech/Pfizer and triple CoronaVac, respectively. While 1.8% of PCR positive COVID-19 cases needed intensive unit care in the pre-vaccination period, intensive care unit was required in 0%, 1.5%, 2.4%, 0% and 4.2% after single BioNTech/ Pfizer, double BioNTech/Pfizer, double CoronaVac+single BioNTech/ Pfizer, double CoronaVac+double BioNTech/Pfizer and triple CoronaVac, respectively. Reinfection rate after vaccination was 0.4%. Conclusions: The rarity of COVID-19 infection after vaccination suggests that efficacy of vaccines is maintained. On the other hand, the data underscore the critical importance of continued public health mitigation.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Differential diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is important among fibrotic interstitial lung diseases (ILD). This study aimed to evaluate the rate of IPF in patients with fibrotic ILD and to determine the clinical-laboratory features of patients with and without IPF that would provide the differential diagnosis of IPF. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included the patients with the usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern or possible UIP pattern on thorax high-resolution computed tomography, and/or UIP pattern, probable UIP or possible UIP pattern at lung biopsy according to the 2011 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT guidelines. Demographics and clinical and radiological data of the patients were recorded. All data recorded by researchers was evaluated by radiology and the clinical decision board. RESULTS: A total of 336 patients (253 men, 83 women, age 65.8±9.0 years) were evaluated. Of the patients with sufficient data for diagnosis (n=300), the diagnosis was IPF in 121 (40.3%), unclassified idiopathic interstitial pneumonia in 50 (16.7%), combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) in 40 (13.3%), and lung involvement of connective tissue disease (CTD) in 16 (5.3%). When 29 patients with definite IPF features were added to the patients with CPFE, the total number of IPF patients reached 150 (50%). Rate of male sex (p<0.001), smoking history (p<0.001), and the presence of clubbing (p=0.001) were significantly high in patients with IPF. None of the women <50 years and none of the men <50 years of age without a smoking history were diagnosed with IPF. Presence of at least 1 of the symptoms suggestive of CTD, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and antinuclear antibody (FANA) positivity rates were significantly higher in the non-IPF group (p<0.001, p=0.029, p=0.009, respectively). CONCLUSION: The rate of IPF among patients with fibrotic ILD was 50%. In the differential diagnosis of IPF, sex, smoking habits, and the presence of clubbing are important. The presence of symptoms related to CTD, ESR elevation, and FANA positivity reduce the likelihood of IPF.
