Functional Outcome of Subvastus versus Medial Parapatellar Approaches for Total Knee Replacement in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background

Subvastus approach and medial parapatellar approach are two major approaches for total knee replacement (TKR). There is no global consensus on the superiority of either approach in terms of functional outcomes.

Objective

The present study aimed to evaluate the functional outcome of TKR through subvastus approach and medial parapatellar approach by using patient-reported scores at 3-, 6-, and 12-month post-operative follow-ups.

Methods

This prospective cohort follow-up study included patients with knee osteoarthritis who underwent elective primary TKR either through the subvastus or medial parapatellar approaches at King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah city, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, from January 2019 to December 2022. Scores from the self-reported Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) were compared in the two groups of patients at 3-, 6-, and 12-month post-operative follow-ups.

Results

A total of 98 patients were included, of which 37 underwent TKR through the subvastus approach and 61 through the medial parapatellar approach. There was an overall significant change over time in both WOMAC and OKS scores (P < 0.001). Patients who underwent the subvastus approach had significantly higher mean of WOMAC and OKS than patients with the medial parapatellar approach at the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (P < 0.05), but not at the 12-month follow-up.

Conclusions

For TKR, the medial parapatellar approach results in better functional outcomes at the 3- and 6- month follow-up periods compared with the subvastus approach.

The Return on Investment value of integrating the WHO Patient Safety Curriculum in Nursing Diploma: Forecasting case study

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with multiple sclerosis: An observational study at a tertiary center in Makkah, Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of rituximab for multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment in terms of reduction in clinical relapses, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score and adverse events.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cross-sectional study conducted at King Abdullah Medical City, from January 2017 to August 2021, involving patients with MS given rituximab, with 1-year follow-up. Clinical parameters were noted pre- and post-treatment to determine efficacy; adverse events were noted to analyze safety. A paired samples t-test was used to compare responses pre- and post-treatment. A p-value<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Among 31 patients, 6 (19.4%) had progressive MS, and 25 (80.6%) had relapsing-remitting MS (mean disease duration=8.12±5.65 years). The annual relapse rate reduced from 1.67±0.97 to 0.06±0.25 (p<0.001), the EDSS score from 3.16±2.14 to 2.80±2.28 (p=0.141) and the MRI activity score from 1.84±1.03 to 1.03±0.18 (p<0.001). Only one patient had enhancing lesion activity post-treatment. The commonest side effect was urinary tract infection (25.8%). Only 2 patients discontinued the drug.

CONCLUSION

Rituximab is an efficient drug in reducing the annual relapse rate and MRI activity of patients with MS, with few tolerable side effects not leading to drug discontinuation or any lethal outcome.

Level of Anxiety Among Healthcare Workers at a Comprehensive Cancer Center During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

Objective The recent coronavirus pandemic (SARS-CoV-2) has severely increased the burden on the field of oncology, leading to the implementation of new rules to overcome its negative impact. An important issue is the psychological impact of the pandemic on already vulnerable populations, such as oncology staff, as reported by oncology associations. This study assessed the anxiety level among oncology staff during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and related it to its risk factors and the effectiveness of departmental interventions that seek to provide coping methods. Methods A cross-sectional survey was administered to the oncology staff at our oncology center. Generalized anxiety disorder scale "yes-or-no" questions were used to determine secondary objectives regarding the concern of infection and the impact of a departmental intervention on overcoming distress. Results Overall, 199 participants were included in the analysis; more than 60% were women, with a median age of 34 years. More than 50% had anxiety and the most significant risk factors were parenthood and contraction of infection (P-value 0.03 and 0.02, respectively). Most responders reported an increase in the workload during the pandemic, but coping methods applied by the administration had improved anxiety levels as reported by a majority of the responders. Conclusion Oncology staff members have been negatively affected by the pandemic, although coping methods helped to improve anxiety. In the future, attention must be focused on the most vulnerable groups.

The willingness of the Saudi Arabian population to participate in the COVID-19 vaccine trial: A case-control study

OBJECTIVES

This study examines the Saudi Arabian population's willingness to participate in clinical trials for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, comparing recovered cases' willingness with that of healthy volunteers.

METHODS

A case-control study was conducted on the Saudi Arabian population during September 2020. The data were collected from recovered COVID-19 participants as the case group, and healthy volunteers as the control group.

RESULTS

The data showed that 42.2% (n = 315) of recovered COVID-19 cases were more willing to participate in the COVID-19 vaccine trial than healthy volunteers (299; 38.1%) with a p < 0.001. The proportion of the participants who were willing to donate plasma was significantly higher among recovered participants, 84.2% (n = 112), than healthy volunteers, 76.3% (n = 87), with a p < 0.0001. The most significant factor responsible for a willingness to participate was the belief that vaccine discovery would help scientific developments (r = 0.525 and 0.465 for case and control, respectively). In comparison, significant reasons behind the unwillingness to participate were the risk of exposure to an unproven vaccine, r = 0.377 and 0.497 for case and control, respectively (p < 0.001), and a discomfort with being treated as an experimental subject (r = 0.275 and 0.374 for case and control, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The differences in readiness toward the COVID-19 vaccine trial in our study does not indicate any passive exposure of participants to an unproven clinical trial vaccine, nor does it shed light on well-informed risk-related decisions. However, certain factors can significantly influence decision-making while contributing toward clinical research. This study's results must not be used for the individuals' recruitment bias in a COVID-19 vaccine trial.