No abstract

No abstract

Background: Worldwide, neurological disorders are the leading cause of disability-adjusted life years lost and the second leading cause of death. Despite global health capacity-building efforts, each year, 22.6 million individuals worldwide require neurosurgeon's care due to diseases such as traumatic brain injury and hydrocephalus, and 13.8 million of these individuals require surgery. It is clear that neurosurgical care is indispensable in both national and international public health discussions. This study highlights the role neurosurgeons can play in supporting the global health agenda, national surgical plans, and health strengthening systems (HSS) interventions.Methods: Guided by a literature review, the authors discuss key topics such as the global burden of neurosurgical diseases, the current state of neurosurgical care around the world and the inherent benefits of strong neurosurgical capability for health systems.Results: Neurosurgical diseases make up an important part of the global burden of diseases. Many neurosurgeons possess the sustained passion, resilience, and leadership needed to advocate for improved neurosurgical care worldwide. Neurosurgical care has been linked to 14 of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), thus highlighting the tremendous impact neurosurgeons can have upon HSS initiatives.Conclusion: We recommend policymakers and global health actors to: (i) increase the involvement of neurosurgeons within the global health dialogue; (ii) involve neurosurgeons in the national surgical system strengthening process; (iii) integrate neurosurgical care within the global surgery movement; and (iv) promote the training and education of neurosurgeons, especially those residing in Low-and middle-income countries, in the field of global public health.

Background: The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic as a large scale stressor could have negative effects on the mental health of medical students. Since gender differences in mental health may exist, it is important to see if a large scale stressor like the pandemic may be associated with variances in the psychological distress between both genders. Objectives: To assess and compare the psychological distress of male and female medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was carried out among 1010 medical students from three universities in southwestern Nigeria within the first six months of the first reported case of the COVID-19 pandemic. The respondents were purposively selected. Data was obtained online on participants’ demographic and psychological distress using the General Health Questionnaire 12 (GHQ-12). Data was analyzed using the SPSS version 21, student t and chi-square tests were used to assess gender differences, and multivariate regression to assess the predictors of psychological distress among both genders. p values less than 0.05were considered statistically significant. Results: Overall, female participants (OR=1.455, 95% CI= 1.095-1.936) were twice more likely to have experienced psychological distress than males during the COVID-19 pandemic. Age (OR=0.922, 95% CI= 0.867-0.979), being in pre-clinical years (OR= 1.394, 95% CI= 1.004-1.938), having a family income less than 100,000 naira (OR= 1.379, 95% CI=1.442-6.723) a previous history of mental illness (OR=3.077, 95% CI= 1.430-6.615) and having a relative/acquaintance diagnosed with COVID 19(OR=1.646, 95% CI= 1.062-2.551) were independently associated with psychological distress among the respondents. When comparing both genders,among females, age (OR=0.886, 95% CI= 0.803-0.978), family income less than 100,000 naira (OR=1.898, 95% CI= 1.306-2.759) and a previous history of mental illness (OR=5.266, 95% CI= 1.894-14.635) were associated with psychological distress, while, being in pre-clinical years (OR= 1.713, 95% CI= 1.052-2.790) was associated with psychological distress among males. Conclusion: Females had more psychological distress compared to male students. It is recommended that gender-specific interventions addressing psychological distress among medical students are instituted. Keywords: Psychological distress; psychological impact; gender; COVID-19; medical students.

Introduction. Most cases of paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity (PSH) result from traumatic brain injury (TBI). Little is known about its pathophysiology and treatment, and several neuroprotective drugs are used including beta-blockers. The aim of our study is to collate existing evidence of the role of beta-blockers in the treatment of PSH. Methods. We searched MEDLINE, ResearchGate, and Google Scholar, for keywords related to PSH and the role of beta-blockers in moderate-to-severe TBI on September 23, 2020. Two authors blindly screened the articles found with Rayyan. Both resolved their conflicts by mutual consent. If no solution was found, a third author was consulted. Simple descriptive data analysis was performed and the results were presented both in a narrative and tabular form. Results. Of the 19 items found, 10 met the criteria for inclusion. 50% were systematic reviews without meta-analysis, 40% were observational studies, and 10% were experimental studies. Propranolol was the main beta-blocker found in 80% of the studies and was the only molecule used in the treatment of paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity in 40% of the included studies. Only two studies evaluated and showed a significant association between beta-blockers and mortality rate (5.1% vs. 10.8%; P = 0.03 ), (3% vs. 15%; P = 0.002 ), respectively. Conclusion. Propranolol is the beta-blocker that has been shown to be effective in reducing the length of stay and mortality rate in moderate-severe traumatic brain injury patients with PSH. However, further studies are needed to precisely define the terms and conditions of its use.