Self-Reported Computer Vision Syndrome among Thai University Students in Virtual Classrooms during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Prevalence and Associated Factors.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, computer vision syndrome (CVS) related to online classrooms were unavoidable. This cross-sectional study aimed to explore the prevalence, characteristics and associated factors of CVS. A total of 527 students who were currently studying in a virtual classroom (70.40% female, mean (standard deviation; SD) age of 20.04 (2.17) years) were included. The prevalence of CVS assessed by an online CVS-Questionnaire was 81.0% (427/527). Comparing with those in the period before the online study, an increase in screen time (interquartile range) in students with and without CVS was 3 (0−3) and 2 (1−5) h, respectively. Overall, 516 students (97.9%) experienced at least one symptom. The most frequent symptom in CVS subjects was eye pain (96.5%). The most intense symptoms were the feeling of worsening eyesight (15.9%). The factors associated with CVS were female (p < 0.001), age (p = 0.010), atopic diseases (p = 0.020), prior ocular symptoms (p < 0.001), astigmatism (p = 0.033), distance from display <20 cm (p = 0.023), presence of glare or reflection on screen (p < 0.001), low screen brightness (p = 0.045), sleep duration (p = 0.030), inadequate break time between classes (p < 0.001) and increased screen time usage during online study (p < 0.001). Recommendations to prevent CVS based on the adjustable factors might reduce the burden of online study.

Treatment Outcomes of Epinephrine for Traumatic Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the standard guidelines stating that giving epinephrine for patients with cardiac arrest is recommended, the clinical benefits of epinephrine for patients with traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) are still limited. This study aims to evaluate the benefits of epinephrine administration in traumatic OHCA patients. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases up to June 30, 2020, without any language restriction in research sources. Studies comparing epinephrine administration for traumatic OHCA patients were included. Two independent authors performed the selection of relevant studies, data extraction, and assessment of the risk of bias. The primary outcome was inhospital survival rate. Secondary outcomes included prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), short-term survival, and favorable neurological outcome. We calculated the odds ratios (ORs) of those outcomes using the Mantel-Haenszel model and assessed the heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Four studies were included. The risk of bias of the included studies was low, except for one study in which the risk of bias was fair. All included studies reported the inhospital survival rate. Epinephrine administration during traumatic OHCA might not demonstrate a benefit for inhospital survival (OR: 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.11-3.37). Epinephrine showed no significant improvement in prehospital ROSC (OR: 4.67, 95% CI: 0.66-32.81). In addition, epinephrine might not increase the chance of short-term survival (OR: 1.41, 95% CI: 0.53-3.79). CONCLUSION: The use of epinephrine for traumatic OHCA may not improve either inhospital survival or prehospital ROSC and short-term survival. Epinephrine administration as indicated in standard advanced life support algorithms might not be routinely used in traumatic OHCA.

Comparing Drugs for Out-of-hospital, Shock-refractory Cardiac Arrest: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: The benefit of medications used in out-of-hospital, shock-refractory cardiac arrest remains controversial. This study aims to compare the treatment outcomes of medications for out-of-hospital, shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation (VF) or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (pVT). METHODS: The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials of participants older than eight years old who had atraumatic, out-of-hospital, shock-refractory VF/pVT in which at least one studied group received a medication. We conducted a database search on October 28, 2019, that included PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL Complete, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Citations of relevant meta-analyses were also searched. We performed frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) to combine the comparisons. The outcomes were analyzed by using odds ratios (OR) and compared to placebo. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. The secondary outcomes included the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission, and the neurological outcome at discharge. We ranked all outcomes using surface under the cumulative ranking score. RESULTS: We included 18 studies with 6,582 participants. The NMA of 20 comparisons included 12 medications and placebo. Only norepinephrine showed a significant increase of ROSC (OR = 8.91, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88-42.29). Amiodarone significantly improved survival to hospital admission (OR = 1.53, 95% CI, 1.01-2.32). The ROSC and survival-to-hospital admission data were significantly heterogeneous with the I2 of 55.1% and 59.1%, respectively. This NMA satisfied the assumption of transitivity. CONCLUSION: No medication was associated with improved survival to hospital discharge from out-of-hospital, shock-refractory cardiac arrest. For the secondary outcomes, norepinephrine was associated with improved ROSC and amiodarone was associated with an increased likelihood of survival to hospital admission in the NMA.