Barriers to Screening and Possibilities for Active Detection of Family Medicine Attendees Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence

Introduction

In 1996 the World Health Organization declared intimate partner violence (IPV) the most important public health problem. Meta-analyses in 2013 showed every third female globally had been a victim of violence. Experts find screening controversial; family medicine is the preferred environment for identifying victims of violence, but barriers on both sides prevent patients from discussing it with doctors.

Methods

In July 2014, a qualitative study was performed through semi-structured interviews with ten family doctors of different ages and gender, working in rural or urban environments. Sound recordings of the interviews were transcribed, and the record verified. The data were interpreted using content analysis. A coding scheme was developed and later verified and analysed by two independent researchers. The text of the interviews was analysed according to the coding scheme.

Results

Two coding schemes were developed: one for screening, and the other for the active detection of IPV. The main themes emerging as barriers to screening were lack of time, staff turnover, inadequate finance, ignorance of a clear definition, poor commitment to screening, obligatory follow-up, risk of deterioration of the doctor-patient relationship, and insincerity on the part of the patient. Additionally, cultural aspects of violence, uncertainty/ helplessness, fear, lack of competence and qualifications, autonomy/negative experience, and passive role/stigma/ fear on the part of the patients were barriers to active detection.

Conclusion

All the participating doctors had had previous experience with active detection of IPV and were aware of its importance. Due to several barriers to screening for violence they preferred active detection.     

Multi-institutional analysis of cervical esophageal carcinoma patients treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy: TROD 01-005 study

The aim of this study was to examine the prognostic factors and treatment outcomes of cervical esophageal carcinoma (CEC) patients who underwent definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT). The clinical data of 175 biopsy-confirmed CEC patients treated with definitive CRT between April 2005 and September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The prognostic factors predicting overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were assessed in uni- and multivariable analyses. The median age of the entire cohort was 56 years (range: 26–87 years). All patients received definitive radiotherapy with a median total dose of 60 Gy, and 52% of the patients received cisplatin-based concurrent chemotherapy. The 2-year OS, PFS, and LRFS rates were 58.8%, 46.9%, and 52.4%, respectively, with a median follow-up duration of 41.6 months. Patients’ performance status, clinical nodal stage, tumor size, and treatment response were significant prognostic factors for OS, PFS, and LRFS in univariate analysis. Non-complete treatment response was an independent predictor for poor OS (HR = 4.41, 95% CI, 2.78–7.00, p < 0.001) and PFS (HR = 4.28, 95% CI, 2.79–6.58, p < 0.001), whereas poor performance score was a predictor for worse LRFS (HR = 1.83, 95% CI, 1.12–2.98, p = 0.02) in multivariable analysis. Fifty-two patients (29.7%) experienced grade II or higher toxicity. In this multicenter study, we demonstrated that definitive CRT is a safe and effective treatment for patients with CEC. Higher radiation doses were found to have no effect on treatment outcomes, but a better response to treatment and a better patient performance status did.     

Assessing Empathic Attitudes in Medical Students: The Re-validation of the Jefferson Scale of Empathy-Student Version Report

Introduction

Self-reported scales, such as the Jefferson Scale of Empathy – Student version (JSE-S), had been recognised to measure the empathic disposition rather than behavioural expression. This study aimed to re-validate the JSE-S and its factor structure prior further research on empathy in medical students.

Methods

A convenience sampling method was employed in two consecutive academic years, in 2012/13 and 2013/14, at the Faculty of Medicine in Ljubljana, Slovenia; first and final year students participated voluntarily. The JSE-S examined empathy levels. The principal component analysis was performed with Oblimin rotation and Kaisers’ criteria. Factors with eigenvalues ≥ 1.25 were retained and items loading ≥ |0.40| were required for the interpretation of the factor structure.

Results

The total study sample size was 845 students, (580 (68.6%)) of them women; 327 (72.2%) were in the first (19.2 ± 1.9 years old) and 253 (61.7%) in the sixth (24.9 ± 1.1 years old) year of medical school. Females achieved higher JSE-S scores in all groups.The three-factor JSE-S was confirmed, but only seven items were concordant in all groups. A higher proportion of explained variation for Perspective Taking and Standing in the Patient’s Shoes, and better internal consistency, was found in a reduced-item scale (16–18 items). When performing factor analysis of a seven-item scale, the percentages of explained variance increased with two factors extracted.

Conclusions

Only the cognitive dimension of JSE-S gave results as expected, therefore proper terminology, i.e. the object of assessment, must be used in further administration of JSE-S and empathy-related research in medical students.     

BPC-157,一种胃十五肽的抗焦虑作用:休克探查/埋藏试验和明暗试验(英文)

AIM: To study anxiolytic effect of a gastric pentade-capeptide, BPC-157. METHODS: In shock probe/burying test, pentadecapeptide BPC-157 (10 μg/kg, 10ng/kg, ip), diazepam (0.075, 0.0375 mg/kg, ip),and an equivolume of saline (5 mL/kg, ip) were givenat 30 min prior test. In light/dark test, the same dosageof diazepam, BPC-157, and saline were given at 45 minPrior procedure. RESULTS: Shock probe/buryingtest: rats treated with either diazepam or pentadecapeptideBPC-157 were much less afraid after the shock: almost