No abstract

Significant gaps exists in HL knowledge among healthcare providers and patients that needs immediate intervention. Such as, greater effort placed in creating a health system that provides an opportunity for healthcare providers to learn about HL and patients to access health information with taking consideration of their perceived barriers.

IntroductionPatients’ health literacy (HL) has emerged as a critical determinant of health outcomes and becoming one of the core competencies of health-care providers. Therefore, this study aimed to assess among Malaysian physicians, pharmacists, and nurses, their HL-related knowledge, attitude, and perceived barriers, and also to determine the associated factors.MethodsA cross-sectional study design was used to enroll 600 eligible respondents using stratified sampling from 6 public hospitals in Penang, Malaysia. A validated self-administered questionnaire was used for data collection. Descriptive and inferential analysis was performed with statistical significance defined as p < 0.05.ResultsThe response rate was 87.6% with 526 questionnaires completed. Of these, 34.2% had poor knowledge, and more than half had negative attitude (51.9%) toward HL with no significant differences among physicians, pharmacists, and nurses. The majority of the respondents perceived time constraints and lack of human resources as major HL barriers. Respondents who had heard the term or concept of HL had significantly higher level of knowledge (p < 0.001) and more positive attitude (p < 0.001). While longer service years (≥11 years) significantly contribute to the higher level of HL knowledge among health-care providers (p = 0.028).ConclusionThe study findings supported the concern on inadequate knowledge and substantially negative attitude toward HL among study health-care providers with highest cited barriers were time constraint and human resources. Thus, efforts to improve their perspective about HL to be effective patient educators are highly advocated.

Purpose Tocilizumab has shown equivocal outcomes in reducing mortality in COVID-19. The corticosteroids appear to be an affordable alternative to tocilizumab. This study aims to estimate the efficacy of tocilizumab and the corticosteroids particularly dexamethasone and methylprednisolone and to identify possible determinants of their efficacy. Methods Five electronic databases were searched for studies involving tocilizumab, dexamethasone, and methylprednisolone in treating COVID-19. We included case–control and randomized or partially randomized trials. Meta-regression for patient baseline characteristics, co-medications, and tocilizumab dose regimens was performed to identify contributing factors to drug efficacy. Results Thirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and twenty-four case–control studies were included in our meta-analysis involving 18,702 patients. Meta-analysis among the RCTs showed that a summary estimate favoring mortality reduction (OR 0.71, 95%CI 0.55 – 0.92) contributed mainly by tocilizumab and dexamethasone. Among case–control studies, meta-analysis showed mortality reduction (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.36 – 0.75) contributed by tocilizumab and tocilizumab-methylprednisolone combination. Methylprednisolone alone did not reduce mortality except for one study involving high dose pulse therapy. Meta-analysis also found that all three drugs did not significantly reduce mechanical ventilation (OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.32 – 1.60). Conclusion Tocilizumab and dexamethasone emerge as viable options in reducing mortality in severe COVID-19 patients. A tocilizumab-corticosteroid combination strategy may improve therapeutic outcome in cases where single therapy fails. Graphical abstract