Human papillomavirus (HPV) has been implicated in the etiology of a variety of human cancers. Studies investigating the presence of high-risk (HR) HPV in breast tissue have generated considerable controversy over its role as a potential risk factor for breast cancer (BC). This is the first investigation reporting the prevalence and type distribution of high-risk HPV infection in breast tissue in the population of Qatar. A prospective comparison blind research study herein reconnoitered the presence of twelve HR-HPV types’ DNA using multiplex PCR by screening a total of 150 fresh breast tissue specimens. Data obtained shows that HR-HPV types were found in 10% of subjects with breast cancer; of which the presence of HPV was confirmed in 4/33 (12.12%) of invasive carcinomas. These findings, the first reported from the population of Qatar, suggest that the selective presence of HPV in breast tissue is likely to be a related factor in the progression of certain cases of breast cancer.
IntroductionLatent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) screening with targeted treatment has been successful in eradicating tuberculosis (TB) as an endemic infection in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends screening for high-risk patients. The aim of this study was to increase LTBI screening, detection, and treatment in our student-run free clinic while providing an innovative platform for education in primary care topics.MethodsA questionnaire for screening for LTBI was adapted from CDC guidelines. Medical students and providers received education on the screening process and administered questionnaires to patients. We analyzed the rate of performed LTBI screening, the rate of diagnostic testing for patients with positive screening, and the feasibility of implementing a preventive screening initiative.ResultsFifty-two patients completed primary care visits. Forty patients were screened for LTBI. Of those screened, 42.5% were positive for the screening. Of those with positive screening, 70.6% were followed up via diagnostic testing, with the rest of them being lost for follow-up due to not attending the clinic for care.ConclusionsThis educational intervention combined with a screening tool was effective in increasing LTBI screening rates amongst patients in a student-run free clinic.
IntroductionThe emergency department (ED) is under pressure to meet length of stay (LOS) metrics for care in the ED. An aspect that we propose affects LOS is the order for urine sample collection and subsequent urinalysis (UA) as both are time consuming steps. This project’s primary goals are to determine if ordering a UA increases LOS and how often UA contributes to clinical decision-making and/or disposition decisions in the ED. Secondary objectives were to identify factors that contribute to the ordering of a UA and to decipher if LOS was more impacted in patients who were discharged vs. admitted to the hospital.MethodsRetrospective chart review was conducted of patients who presented to our ED in April 2016 during 12 consecutive days. Data were abstracted onto a data collection sheet with the abstractor blinded to study hypotheses. Variables included whether a UA was ordered, times of UA order and result, who ordered the UA (mid-level provider [MLP] vs. physician), whether the UA was cancelled, whether the UA result influenced clinical decision-making (based on the medical decision-making section of the physician chart) or disposition decision, LOS, age, and gender. Descriptive statistics and multivariable regression analysis were used to analyze relationships between the variables collected and their influence on LOS.ResultsThe overall median LOS was 157 minutes, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 81 to 246 minutes. For discharged patients, it was 142 minutes, with an IQR of 46 to 236 minutes. For admitted patients, it was 177 minutes, with an IQR of 118 to 260 minutes. Amongst admitted patients, multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that the following factor was associated with increased LOS: being seen first by the provider-in-triage (PIT) then physician in main ED (p < 0.0001). Amongst discharged patients, multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that the following factors were associated with increased LOS: being seen first by the PIT then physician in main ED (p = 0.0296), being seen by MLP only (p < 0.0001), having a UA ordered (p = 0.0005), being seen on weekend (p = 0.0166), and being an older patient (p = 0.0475). The UA was cancelled in 9% of our patients, and in 60% of cases, these UAs were ordered by the PIT. Patient disposition decision was made prior to UA resulting in 60 cases (25%). The UA was used in clinical decision-making in 118 cases (66%). The following predictor factors were associated via univariate analysis with using a UA for decision-making: being female (p = 0.0050, 95% CI: 0.0068–0.378), being an older patient (p < 0.0001, 95% CI: -0.010 to -0.004), being first seen by the PIT and then a physician (p = 0.0486, 95% CI: 0.0048–0.1555), and discharged patients (p < 0.0001, 95% CI: -0.6749 to -0.4487).ConclusionOur results suggest that having a UA ordered increased ED LOS, especially in patients who are ultimately discharged. In our ED, routine UAs are ordered more often by MLPs than physicians. A routine UA may not impact clinical decision-making up to 33% of the ti...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.