Objective: To assess the usefulness of online teaching for undergraduate students during this Corona pandemic, to point the drawbacks of online teaching, and to learn the areas of improvement in online teaching for the future. Material and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study on 130 students was done in Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India. The questionnaire consisted of two parts, personal details and specific information. The first part of the questionnaire consisted of questions related to age, gender, etc. The second part had questions pertaining to online teaching. Pearson's Chi-square test was applied and the level of significance was set at 5%. Results: Most of the students (83.3%) were in the view that classroom lectures are the best mean of imparting knowledge, which was significant (p<0.001). A significant number of students (88.1%) agreed that online teaching is the best method of teaching apart from classroom teaching. Almost all the students (93%) agreed significantly that online teaching is the best way to learn in this present pandemic scenario. Most students (59.6%) agreed that connectivity/network issue is a major drawback in online teaching, which is again significant (p<0.001). Conclusion: Here in these testing times, the role of online teaching becomes important for medical/dental students, both undergraduates and postgraduates, to keep up with their studies.

Objective: To interpret the change in child's behaviour in presence/absence of parents during dental care. Material and Methods: Sixty children were examined till the age of 12 years visiting the out patient department of pediatric dentistry where parents along with the child were allowed in the operatory. After sometime parents were asked to leave and behavioural changes were noted. During revisit again the behaviour was noted according to Frankl scale. McNemar test was applied to test the behaviour response of children with parental absence/presence. The significance level was set at 5 %. Results: In 1st visit, 78.3% showed positive behaviour and 21.7% showed negative behaviour in parental absence, indicating that the child has more likelihood of showing positive behaviour in the presence of parents (p<0.001). More positive behaviour of the children is noticed, when the parents are present in 3-5 year age group. In other 6-8 and 9-12 year age group, no difference was noticed in the presence or absence of the parents (p>0.05). In second visit, the negative behaviour reduced. When parents were absent 21.7% showed negative behaviour (p=0.000). This indicated that the child has more likelihood of showing positive behaviour in the presence of parents. Age group-wise analysis revealed that in the 3-5 years age group presence or absence of parents is a significant factor for child's behaviour. This factor is a non-issue in the elder age group like 6-8 years and 9-12 years. When the parents are absent, no significant difference was observed (p>0.05). Conclusion: There was no significant difference in parental presence/absence in elder children while the same can't be said for younger children.

ImportanceCancer screening deficits during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic were found to persist into 2021. Cancer-related deaths over the next decade are projected to increase if these deficits are not addressed.ObjectiveTo assess whether participation in a nationwide quality improvement (QI) collaborative, Return-to-Screening, was associated with restoration of cancer screening.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsAccredited cancer programs electively enrolled in this QI study. Project-specific targets were established on the basis of differences in mean monthly screening test volumes (MTVs) between representative prepandemic (September 2019 and January 2020) and pandemic (September 2020 and January 2021) periods to restore prepandemic volumes and achieve a minimum of 10% increase in MTV. Local QI teams implemented evidence-based screening interventions from June to November 2021 (intervention period), iteratively adjusting interventions according to their MTVs and target. Interrupted time series analyses was used to identify the intervention effect. Data analysis was performed from January to April 2022.ExposuresCollaborative QI support included provision of a Return-to-Screening plan-do-study-act protocol, evidence-based screening interventions, QI education, programmatic coordination, and calculation of screening deficits and targets.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of QI projects reaching target MTV and counterfactual differences in the aggregate number of screening tests across time periods.ResultsOf 859 cancer screening QI projects (452 for breast cancer, 134 for colorectal cancer, 244 for lung cancer, and 29 for cervical cancer) conducted by 786 accredited cancer programs, 676 projects (79%) reached their target MTV. There were no hospital characteristics associated with increased likelihood of reaching target MTV except for disease site (lung vs breast, odds ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7 to 4.7). During the preintervention period (April to May 2021), there was a decrease in the mean MTV (slope, −13.1 tests per month; 95% CI, −23.1 to −3.2 tests per month). Interventions were associated with a significant immediate (slope, 101.0 tests per month; 95% CI, 49.1 to 153.0 tests per month) and sustained (slope, 36.3 tests per month; 95% CI, 5.3 to 67.3 tests per month) increase in MTVs relative to the preintervention trends. Additional screening tests were performed during the intervention period compared with the prepandemic period (170 748 tests), the pandemic period (210 450 tests), and the preintervention period (722 427 tests).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this QI study, participation in a national Return-to-Screening collaborative with a multifaceted QI intervention was associated with improvements in cancer screening. Future collaborative QI endeavors leveraging accreditation infrastructure may help address other gaps in cancer care.

No abstract

No abstract