RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the differences in vaccine hesitancy and preference of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines between two countries, namely, China and the United States (U.S.). METHOD: A cross-national survey was conducted in both China and the United States, and discrete choice experiments, as well as Likert scales, were utilized to assess vaccine preference and the underlying factors contributing to vaccination acceptance. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to enable a direct comparison between the two countries. RESULTS: A total of 9077 (5375 and 3702 from China and the United States, respectively) respondents completed the survey. After propensity score matching, over 82.0% of respondents from China positively accepted the COVID-19 vaccination, while 72.2% of respondents from the United States positively accepted it. Specifically, only 31.9% of Chinese respondents were recommended by a doctor to have COVID-19 vaccination, while more than half of the U.S. respondents were recommended by a doctor (50.2%), local health board (59.4%), or friends and families (64.8%). The discrete choice experiments revealed that respondents from the United States attached the greatest importance to the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines (44.41%), followed by the cost of vaccination (29.57%), whereas those from China held a different viewpoint, that the cost of vaccination covered the largest proportion in their trade-off (30.66%), and efficacy ranked as the second most important attribute (26.34%). Additionally, respondents from China tended to be much more concerned about the adverse effect of vaccination (19.68% vs. 6.12%) and have a lower perceived severity of being infected with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Although the overall acceptance and hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccination in both countries are high, underpinned distinctions between these countries were observed. Owing to the differences in COVID-19 incidence rates, cultural backgrounds, and the availability of specific COVID-19 vaccines in the two countries, vaccine rollout strategies should be nation-dependent.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: With guidance from the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Cancer Staging Manual, 8th edition, we explored the characteristics of central lymph node metastasis (CLNM) of papillary thyroid micro-carcinoma (PTMC) in elderly patients ≥55 years of age. Our goal was to provide references for establishing a lymph node dissection scheme in such patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of thyroid cancer patients admitted to the Head and Neck Surgery Center of Sichuan Cancer Hospital, Chengdu, China, from January 2015 to September 2018. Then, we screened and analyzed eligible PTMC cases in strict accordance with our inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: The study included 107 patients, including 24 men and 83 women. Median age was 59.99 ± 4.58 years. The maximum diameter range of the cancer foci was 4-10 mm, and the median was 7.59 ± 1.78 mm. Unilateral lobectomy had been performed in 32 cases, total thyroidectomy in 75 cases and lateral cervical lymph node dissection in 21 cases. There were 60 cases of CLNM (56.07%) and 13 cases of lateral cervical lymph node metastasis (12.10%). The sensitivity of preoperative ultrasound in predicting CLNM was 100%, but its accuracy was only 50.47%. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that multiple cancer foci (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.632), extra-thyroidal expansion of cancer focus (AUC = 0.721), and irregular nodules (AUC = 0.603) were independent risk factors for CLNM of PTMC in elderly patients (P < 0.05). Overall predictability for PTMC-CLNM was 80.30%. CONCLUSION: 1) Preoperative color Doppler ultrasound is not recommended as the basis for cervical lymph node dissection in PTMC patients. 2) For multiple cancer foci, irregular nodules, and elderly patients with PTMC extra-thyroidal expansion, we recommend a prophylactic central lymph node dissecting. 3) Nonsurgical observation of PTMC in elderly patients with low risk should be carefully selected.
