Objectives: The corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected every domain of human health be it physical or mental. The uncertainty of disease progression in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection can lead to major psychological and psychiatric concerns that should not be overlooked. The interventions should be directed to the vulnerable population to help them mitigate the stress and anxiety caused by the infection and isolation. We evaluated the effect of meditation and breathing exercises on the well-being of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection under institutional isolation. Materials and Methods: We conducted a randomized control trial on 84 subjects, 18 years and above, asymptomatic, or mildly symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected patients under institutional isolation. Subjects were randomly and equally divided into a control group and interventional group. We measured the depression, anxiety, and stress levels as well as quality of sleep in patients after 7 days of meditation and breathing exercises in the intervention group versus standard care in the control group. Results: Meditation and breathing exercises had a statistically significant effect on the depression level (P < 0.001), stress level (P = 0.004), and the quality of sleep [trouble falling asleep (P = 0.007), trouble staying asleep (P = 0.004), and feel tired after waking up in the morning (P = 0.003)]. Further, the positive effect of intervention on the level of anxiety in patients under isolation was also observed; however, the difference was not found to be statistically significant (P = 0.528). Conclusion: Meditation and breathing exercises have positive effects on depression, stress levels, and quality of sleep in COVID-19 positive patients under strict institutional isolation.

Context:Inadequate training of medical practitioners is a key factor responsible for inappropriate use of opioid analgesics.Aims:We assessed the current knowledge, attitude, prescribing practices, and barriers perceived by the Indian medical practitioners in three tertiary care hospitals toward the use of opioid analgesics.Subjects and Methods:Web-based survey of registered medical practitioner employed at three chosen tertiary health care institutions in New Delhi.Statistical Analysis Used:Descriptive analysis of survey responses was carried out. Comparative analysis was done using Chi-square test, independent samples t-test, and Pearson correlation coefficient.Results:The response rate was 10.4% (n = 308). Two-thirds of the participants (61.7%) had never received formal pain management training, and 86.7% participants would like further training. Most participants (71.1%) agreed that opioids should be prescribed in cancer pain, while 26.3% agreed that opioids should be prescribed in noncancer pain. Half of the participants agreed that SOS (if necessary) dosing schedule (48.4%), low dosage (61.7%), and short duration of use (51.4%) could decrease the harmful effect of opioids. Lack of information about opioid-related policies and addiction potential were identified as the most common barriers to prescribing opioids. Those seeing more patients with chronic noncancer pain come across opioid misuse and diversion more often (P = 0.02). Those who understood addiction were more likely to agree that patients of chronic cancer pain with substance use disorders should be prescribed opioid analgesics (P < 0.01).Conclusions:Indian medical practitioners felt the need for formal pain management training. There is a lack of consensus on how to manage the pain using opioid analgesics. Tough regulations on medical and scientific use of opioids are the most commonly reported barrier to prescribing them.

Background: Year 2020 started with global health crisis known as COVID-19. In lack of established tools and management protocols, COVID-19 had become breeding ground for fear and confusion, leading to stigma toward affected individuals. Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted to estimate prevalence of stigma in discharged COVID-19 patients from a COVID hospital in India. Participants were approached telephonically using a semistructured questionnaire to record their experiences. Questions were asked regarding stigma at six major domains of daily life. Among total 1,673 discharged participants, 600 were conveniently selected and out of them 311 responded on telephonic interviews. Result: We found that 182 (58.52%) participants (95% CI: 53.04–64.00) have self-perceived stigma, 163 (52.41%) participants (95% CI: 46.86–57.96) experienced quarantine-related stigma, 222 (71.38%) participants (95% CI: 66.36–76.40) experienced neighborhood stigma, 214 (68.81%) participants (95% CI: 63.66–73.95) experienced stigma while going out in marketplaces, 180 (57.88%) participants (95% CI: 52.39–63.37) experienced stigma at their work place, and 207 (66.56%) participants (95% CI: 61.31–71.80) reported stigma experienced by their family members. With a total of 84.5% (95% CI: 80.06–88.39) participants experiencing stigma at some domain and about 42.8% of participants facing stigma at all six domains. The commonest noted cause of stigma was fear of getting infected, reported by 184 (59.2%) participants. Conclusion: This study shows high prevalence of stigma in COVID-19 patients suffering in their common domains of daily lives.

Objective: Health-care professionals (HCPs) are the frontline warriors in the time of this uncertain and unpredictable crisis of COVID. They face many challenges while caring for these patients, yet they are expected to cope with it and deliver their duties for the betterment of humankind. Our primary aim was to identify and assess the concerns of HCPs working in COVID area in a tertiary institutional isolation center. Methodology: An online Google-based questionnaire survey was distributed through various social media platforms after approval of the institutional review board to a total of 100 HCPs who were treating and managing COVID-positive patients. Results: Of 100 responses, 72% were concerned about the risk of infection to self and family, while 46% reported disruption of their daily activities at a personal level. At the institutional level, 17% were concerned about inadequate personal protective equipment-related challenges. 20% had inadequate knowledge and training about COVID. 16% of participants were anxious all the time, 11% feared all the time, and 12% had stress all the time while treating COVID patients. Connectedness and communication with family and friends, word of appreciation, music, and TV were few strategies to cope up with these challenges. Conclusion: There is a need to identify and address the concerns and challenges faced by HCPs and to develop a comprehensive strategy and guideline to provide a holistic care and to ensure their security in the workplace.

Objectives: Long-term opioid use can be associated with misuse and addiction. In the backdrop of increasing burden of cancer patients in India, it is important to assess the rate of opioid use disorders among those with chronic cancer pain. The objectives were to measure the rate of opioid use disorder in chronic cancer pain patients being managed with morphine and to assess its association with demographic and clinical characteristics. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on chronic cancer pain patients who were prescribed morphine for ≥12 months, dosage of ≥60 mg/day. They were assessed using MINI version 7.0.0, WHO-ASSIST Hindi questionnaire, Addiction Behavior Checklist, and DSM-5 for opioid use disorder. Results: Forty patients who were treated with morphine for a total of 1479 months participated. The average morphine consumption was 159.50 ± 327.90 mg/day. Six (15%) showed possible inappropriate opioid analgesic use and none of the patients had opioid use disorder. Conclusion: This study reports the absence of opioid use disorder due to vigilant use of morphine in chronic cancer patients.