Background: Caesarean section (C-section) is the most common surgery among women worldwide, and the global rate of this surgical procedure has been continuously rising. Hence, it is significantly crucial to develop and apply highly effective and safe caesarean section techniques. In this review study, we aimed at assessing the safety and effectiveness of the Joel-Cohen-based technique and comparing the results with the transverse Pfannenstiel incision for C-section. Methods: In this study, various reliable databases such as the PubMed Central, COCHRANE, DARE, and Ovid MEDLINE were targeted. Reviews, systematic reviews, and randomized clinical trial studies comparing the Joel-Cohen-based technique and the transverse Pfannenstiel incision were selected based on the inclusion criteria. Selected studies were checked by 2 independent reviewers based on the inclusion criteria, and the quality of these studies was assessed. Then, their data were extracted and analyzed. Results: Five randomized clinical trial studies met the inclusion criteria. According to the exiting evidence, statistical results of the Joel-Cohen-based technique showed that this technique is more effective compared to the transverse Pfannenstiel incision. Metaanalysis results of the 3 outcomes were as follow: operation time (5 trials, 764 women; WMD -9.78; 95% CI:-14.49-5.07 minutes, p<0.001), blood loss (3 trials, 309 women; WMD -53.23ml; 95% –CI: 90.20-16.26 ml, p= 0.004), and post-operative hospital stay (3 trials, 453 women; WMD -.69 day; 95% CI: 1.4-0.03 day, p<0.001). Statistical results revealed a significant difference between the 2 techniques. Conclusion: According to the literature, despite having a number of side effects, the Joel-Cohen-based technique is generally more effective than the Pfannenstiel incision technique. In addition, it was recommended that the Joel-Cohen-based technique be used as a replacement for the Pfannenstiel incision technique according to the surgeons’ preferences and the patients’ conditions.

Background and objective: Health literacy is defined as 'one's capacity to understand and interpret the basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions'. In addition, those with insufficient health literacy are less likely to understand the written and oral information presented by health specialists. Hence, insufficient health literacy is considered a global threat nowadays, the present study aimed to investigate the health literacy status among the visitors to the specialized clinics based in Kermanshah, Iran, in 2016. Methods: The current study was a descriptive cross-sectional study. To collect the required data, the valid and reliable test of functional health literacy in adults (TOFHFLA) was employed. After data collection, the data were entered into the SPSS Statistics 16 Software. In addition, for data analysis, the descriptive statistics and the statistical tests of analysis of variance (ANOVA), Independent t-test and regression analysis were used. Results: The mean score of health literacy among the subjects under study was 51.93 ±6.31. Further, the results revealed that the relationship between health literacy and each of the variables of education (P<0.05), Residence area (P<0.05), Household dimension (P<0.05) were significant and age (p=1.02), marital status (p=6.31), gender (p=0.5) and occupation (p=6.31) were not significant. The results revealed that the relationship between health literacy and each of the variables of age (p=1.02), marital status (p=6.31), gender (p=0.5) and occupation (p=6.31) were not significant. Conclusion: This study showed that average health literacy in the population is estimated to be average. Recommended with changes at the macro level of society in terms of education and research increased health literacy. Paper Type: Research Article.

No abstract

Background: This study aimed to investigate the economic evaluation of remote monitoring of type 2 diabetic patients for controlling glycosylated hemoglobin, compared to routine care. Methods: Economic evaluation was carried out to calculate the unit cost of the remote patient monitoring (RPM) technology and routine treatment for type 2 diabetics, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and sensitivity analysis using the key variables, such as population size and cost items (in five categories of equipment and devices, building, staff, overhead costs, and consumables costs). Results: Considering the ICER in the base-case model and in comparison to the routine treatment of type 2 diabetes, the remote type 2 diabetes monitoring system was placed in the second quarter (i.e., more effective and affordable technology) of the graph as the most dominant alternative (RPM vs. routine care: Total annual cost difference: -38476.477 US$/Unit reduction in hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] difference: 0.488). The results of the sensitivity analysis revealed that in all scenarios, RPM was dominant, compared to routine treatment (the optimum ICER: -610.128 US$ per “Unit reduction in HbA1c” for the scenario with a 10% increase in the costs of the control and intervention group). Conclusions: The RPM is a dominant alternative in comparison to routine treatment. The results indicated that the RPM interventions of 2 diabetes play an effective role in the reduction of HbA1c, which might be considered the rationale for policymakers to use this technology.