Objective: This study included participants from Hacettepe University 4th, 5th, and 6th-grade students of Medical School and 4th and 5th-grade students of Dental School; and aimed to evaluate the general health status, COVID-19 history, vaccination status, and SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels of the participants to support their physical and social health, during the pandemic period. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted with an integrated, matched, nested case-control study. Sociodemographic characteristics, life habits, COVID-19 history, vaccination status, compliance with mask-distance-hygiene rules, and risks (if any) for COVID-19 were inquired via online questionnaires. Physical examinations, complete blood count, biochemistry tests, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody tests were conducted for all consenting participants. All analyses were established using depersonalized data. Results: Of the 778 participants completing the baseline visit in June-July 2021, the percentages of those vaccinated with at least one, two, and three/more doses of COVID-19 vaccine were 99.1%, 98.0%, and 11.7%, respectively; one had four doses. The median (minimum-maximum) time since the last vaccination was 134 (34-166) days for those vaccinated with two doses [CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences, Beijing, China)] and 25 (14-56) days for those vaccinated with three doses [two doses of CoronaVac and a last dose of Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine (Comirnaty®). The third dose was applied at a median of 164 (151-202) days after the second dose, and all were heterologous in type. The median (minimum-maximum) antibody level for the overall group was 53.55(0-5680) BAU/mL: 47.19 BAU/mL in those who received two doses, with a more than 100 times increase after a third dose (4943.64 BAU/mL). Of the 522 participants followed up to October 1, 2021, 6 PCR-positive symptomatic participants were diagnosed with COVID-19: the incidence rate was 4/1000 person-months. Conclusion: A 100-fold neutralizing antibody level following the third dose demonstrated the importance of a booster dose. Given the time lag between doses, antibody measurements of BioNTech recipients should be repeated in the upcoming months. Booster selection should involve antibody level, variant sensitivity of the vaccine, and individual characteristics of the recipient.
Objectives This study aims to compare three glenohumeral dislocation (GHD) reduction techniques in terms of pain and reduction time and to offer clinicians an idea of the selection of the most appropriate technique. Patients and methods This multi-center, prospective, randomized clinical study included a total of 90 patients (55 males, 35 females; median age: 29 years; range, 22 to 41 years) who had isolated anterior GHD without complication between December 2019 and December 2021. The patients were divided into three equal groups (traction-countertraction [TCT], external rotation [ExR], and Cunningham) using the block randomization method, and reductions were performed. Pre-reduction, intra-reduction, and post-reduction Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, reduction times, success rates, and complication rates were analyzed. Results There was no statistically significant difference among the groups in terms of age (p=0.414), sex (p=0.954), pre-reduction VAS (p=0.175), and post-reduction VAS (p=0.204). The median intra-reduction VAS values in the TCT, the external rotation, and the Cunningham groups were 8 (range, 7 to 9), 5 (range, 4 to 7), and 4 (range, 2.75 to 5), respectively (p<0.001). The median reduction time and IQR were 105 (range, 82.5 to 120) sec for TCT, 270 (range, 232.5 to 300) sec for ExR, and 630 (range, 540 to 780) sec for Cunningham (p=0.001). Conclusion The fastest, but most painful technique is TCT, while the longest and the least painful technique is Cunningham. An inverse relationship is found between time and pain. Based on these findings, it seems to be reasonable to leave the choice of the ideal reduction technique to the clinician. The clinician should choose the technique to be used according to the conditions in the emergency department.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.