Search

Abstract Background Developmental delays in children are assessed in four basic domains: gross motor, fine motor, social, and language. Early years of life are crucial in a child’s development, so it is imperative that parents be aware of developmental milestones to facilitate early diagnosis and treatment in case of a developmental delay. This study assessed parental knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding children’s developmental milestones and associated “red flags”. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of Pediatrics at Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi. 390 parents, who had at least one child under 5 years of age, with no diagnosed developmental delay, were interviewed during outpatient clinic visits. The questionnaire consisted of three components to assess parental knowledge, attitude, and practices. Results 59% and 54% of parents had poor knowledge of gross and fine motor milestones respectively; In the social domain, 56% of the respondents had inadequate knowledge. 42% had inadequate knowledge of language milestones; 29% of parents strongly agreed that their pediatricians provide satisfactory information regarding red flags of developmental milestones. 60% of parents strongly agreed that their child’s developmental delay would be a cause of concern for them. In the case of developmental delay, 55% of parents said they would consult a general pediatrician, 11% preferred a pediatric neurologist, 21% opted for a developmental pediatrician and 13% opted for a family physician. Residence and family systems were found to be associated with language-related milestones with significantly higher odds of knowledge among urban residents than rural ones and a significantly lower likelihood of language milestones knowledge among joint families than nuclear families. Female gender was found to be significantly associated with positive attitude. Conclusion The majority of our respondents showed considerably poor knowledge regarding developmental milestones. This highlights the need to devise ways to educate parents on this subject to enable them to vigilantly monitor their child’s developmental status and any associated abnormalities and ultimately facilitate the right course of action.

Introduction: Uterine fibroids are the commonest benign tumors of the reproductive tract in women of childbearing age. They are usually asymptomatic but can cause menorrhagia. Treatments include myomectomy and uterine artery embolization (UAE). The latter is a relatively new procedure, therefore of special interest. Objectives: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies to provide a comprehensive outlook on the effectiveness of UAE by comparing its outcomes to those of myomectomy. Electronic databases (PubMed and Cochrane Central) were systematically searched from January 2000 to March 2022 for published randomized control trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses that compared UAE to myomectomy for at least one of the pre-specified outcomes, namely re-intervention rates, length of hospital stay, and complications. Methods: We shortlisted nine studies for the final analysis. For continuous outcomes, results from random-effects meta-analysis were presented as mean differences (MDs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model. Results: The final analysis consisted of nine studies. Factors like re-intervention, hospitalization, and complications, each with its unique follow-up duration were assessed. Pooled analysis demonstrated significant results for greater re-intervention rates with UAE as compared to myomectomy (RR: 2.16, 95% CI: (1.27–3.66), p- value 0.004, heterogeneity I 2 = 85%). UAE holds a greater but statistically insignificant risk for major complications (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: (0.29–1.33), p- value 0.22, heterogeneity I 2 = 0%) and myomectomy shows a statistically insignificant greater risk for minor complications (RR: 1.72, 95% CI: (0.92–3.22), p- value 0.09, heterogeneity I 2 = 0%). UAE had a shorter but statistically insignificant duration of hospital stay (MD: −1.12, 95% CI: (−2.50 to 0.27), p- value 0.11, heterogeneity I 2 = 96%) ( p- value for subgroup differences = 0.005). Conclusion: Our meta-analysis of approximately 196,595 patients demonstrates that myomectomy results in a significant reduction in re-intervention rate compared to UAE.

Background: Exposure to noise can increase biological stress reactions and that could increase the risk of stress-related prenatal effects, including adverse obstetric outcomes; however, the association between exposure to noise and adverse obstetric outcomes has not been extensively explored. The objective of this review was to evaluate the evidence between noise exposures and adverse obstetric outcomes, specifically preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, and gestational hypertension. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of English language, comparative studies available in PubMed, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases between January 1, 1980 and December 29, 2021 was performed. Risk of bias for individual studies was assessed using the Risk of Bias Instrument for Nonrandomized Studies of Exposures, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of the body of evidence for each outcome. Results: Six studies reporting on preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, and gestational hypertension were identified. Although some studies suggested there may be signals of increased responses to increased noise exposure for preeclampsia and gestational hypertension, the certainty in the evidence of an effect of increased noise on all the outcomes was very low due to concerns with risk of bias, inconsistency across studies, and imprecision in the effect estimates. Conclusions: While the certainty of the evidence for noise exposure and adverse obstetric outcomes was very low, the findings from this review may be useful for directing further research in this area, as there is currently limited evidence available. These findings may also be useful for informing guidelines and policies involving noise exposure situations or environments.

Background: Exposure to acute noise can cause an increase in biological stress reactions, which provides biological plausibility for a potential association between sustained noise exposure and stress-related health effects. However, the certainty in the evidence for an association between exposures to noise on short- and long-term biomarkers of stress has not been widely explored. The objective of this review was to evaluate the strength of evidence between noise exposure and changes in the biological parameters known to contribute to the development of stress-related adverse cardiovascular responses. Materials and Methods: This systematic review comprises English language comparative studies available in PubMed, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases from January 1, 1980 to December 29, 2021. Where possible, random-effects meta-analyses were used to examine the effect of noise exposure from various sources on stress-related cardiovascular biomarkers. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed using the risk of bias of nonrandomized studies of exposures instrument. The certainty of the body of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Results: The search identified 133 primary studies reporting on blood pressure, hypertension, heart rate, cardiac arrhythmia, vascular resistance, and cardiac output. Meta-analyses of blood pressure, hypertension, and heart rate suggested there may be signals of increased risk in response to a higher noise threshold or incrementally higher levels of noise. Across all outcomes, the certainty of the evidence was very low due to concerns with the risk of bias, inconsistency across exposure sources, populations, and studies and imprecision in the estimates of effects. Conclusions: This review identifies that exposure to higher levels of noise may increase the risk of some short- and long-term cardiovascular events; however, the certainty of the evidence was very low. This likely represents the inability to compare across the totality of the evidence for each outcome, underscoring the value of continued research in this area. Findings from this review may be used to inform policies of noise reduction or mitigation interventions.