Background:There are many factors that affect the quality of life, for example, stress and the coping strategies. Polycystic ovary syndrome is a common hormonal disorder leading to menstrual disorders, hirsutism, acne, obesity, infertility and abortion. In such cases, the patients suffer from a variety of stresses and face problems in their coping strategies with life's problems which can affect the quality of life and cause psychological distress and low the quality of life. The quality of life is a descriptive term which points to health and emotional, social and physical promotion of individuals as well as their ability to perform daily living tasks. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between quality of life and coping strategies in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome.Materials and Methods:To perform this study, randomly 200 women who had inclusion criteria and were referred to Ali Shariati Hospital in Isfahan were selected and responded DLQI questionnaire and Carver coping strategies and form of demographic characteristics.Results:The mean score of quality of life in the patients was 4.14 ± 5.57. It was shown that acne has no effective role on quality of life and coping strategies in contrast in hirsute and non-hirsute patients; there was a significant difference in quality of life P value < 0.001). Also there is a significant relationship between the quality of life and coping strategies (problem solving, cognitive, emotional and social support) (P < 0.05) and quality of life has the highest correlation with emotional strategies (r = 0.46).Conclusion:According to results of this study, patients with PCOS are at risk pcychologicla disorders that may be led to decrease of quality of life. Thus this patients need to support by oppositions strategies. Also not only physical treatment but also psychological surveillance especially social support must be done for them.

No abstract

Background and Objectives: Patient safety in hospital is an essential professional indicator that should be noticed. The thread of fires is of the most potentially dangerous risk that could harm patients and personnel. Hence, we studied operating room staff knowledge about fires, its prevention, and control, based on their specialty and their job tenure. Materials and Methods: This is a descriptive-analytical cross-sectional study. A cluster sampling method was applied, and a quota was considered for each hospital. In each cluster, samples were selected through census method. Data were collected using a three-part questionnaire and analyzed using SPSS version 17 (SPSS, Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). Results: The mean of their knowledge level about fires and its prevention was 2.71 (0.67), and control was 2.62 (0.71). In 66% of cases, the level of knowledge about fires and its prevention, and in 70% of cases, the level of knowledge about methods of fire control have been below the average (P < 0.05). As staff age increases, their level of knowledge increases as well. Hospital they are employed by, their job tenure, and their profession can affect the level of knowledge (P < 0.05). Discussion: This study shows that the staff knowledge about fires, its prevention, and control has been lower than the average limit. Due to the sensitivity of the issue, in terms of susceptibility of the environment and medical equipment for ignition, and also the safety of staff and patients, it is necessary to make facilities for development of staff knowledge, to eliminate defects of staff training by managers, and also to consider standards.

Background: Acute pain management is a core ethical commitment to medical practice. However, there is evidence to suggest that sometimes infiltrative lidocaine (IL) is not used prior to thoracentesis and abdominocentesis due to the belief that two needles cause greater pain than one. However, topical anesthetics like lidocaine-prilocaine cream (LPC) are painless, easy to use, and have less systemic side effects. Therefore, LPC can be a suitable substitute for medical procedures. Objectives: This study was designed to compare the analgesic effects of LPC with IL in thoracentesis and abdominocentesis. Methods: Patients were divided into two study groups, including individuals seeing a physician for a thoracentesis (N = 36) and those seeing a physician for an abdominocentesis (N = 33). Patients were randomly assigned to the IL (N = 35) or LPC (N = 34) groups for diagnostic and/or therapeutic purposes. The IL group received 100 mg of 2% lidocaine 5 minutes prior to their procedure, whereas the LPC group received 2.5 g of lidocaine-prilocaine cream. The cream was spread over a 20 - 25 cm2 area and occluded with dressing plaster for 30 minutes prior to the procedure. In both study groups, the thoracentesis and abdominocentesis were ultrasound-guided. Results: The findings suggest a non-significant difference between overall pain perception in LPC and IL groups generally, as well as specifically in abdominocentesis and thoracentesis groups. Furthermore, the result remained the same after controlling for confounding variables. The number of attempts to perform successful abdominocentesis was significantly higher in the LPC than IL (P-value = 0.003) group but was not significant in the thoracentesis group (P-value = 0.131). The level of patient satisfaction in the LPC and IL groups were not significantly different (P-value > 0.05). Conclusions: Overall, LPC appears to be an appropriate alternative to IL in reducing pain during thoracentesis and abdominocentesis, but it seemed to increase unsuccessful medical procedure attempts.

Objective: Acute low back pain is a common ailment and causes pain and disability. Physicians often prescribe nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to treat acute low back pain; however, due attention has recently been drawn to muscle relaxants to reduce the severity of patients' daily physical dysfunction. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effect of the administration of indomethacin alone compared with methocarbamolas a muscle relaxant and indomethacin as an NSAID on the treatment of acute low back pain. Methods: The present double-blind clinical trial was performed on 64 patients with acute low back pain. The patients were categorized into two groups and received the treatments as follows. Indomethacin capsules of 25 mg every 8 h and placebo tablets every 8 h were administered in the first group (Group I). Indomethacin capsules of 25 mg every 8 h and methocarbamol tablets of 500 mg every 8 h were administered in the second group (Group I + M). Patient pain intensity and physical function based on Back Pain Function Scale (BPFS) were recorded before and 1 week after the intervention. Findings: The present study results revealed that the mean pain reduction of patients in Group I + M was significantly higher than that of Group I (3.66 ± 3.17 vs. 1.84 ± 1.53; P < 0.001). Moreover, the mean BPFS increase in Group I + M was significantly higher than that of Group I (19.44 ± 8.66 vs. 4.75 ± 4.35; P < 0.001). Conclusion: According to the results of the present study, concomitant administration of indomethacin and methocarbamol can be more effective in reducing pain intensity and improving the patient's physical function (or performance).