Showing 4 results for Ace
A.k. Alamdari, R. Taheri, A. Afrasiabifar, M.l. Rastian,
Volume 1, Issue 2 (4-2020)
Abstract
Aims: Several studies have shown controversy over the effectiveness of various educational methods. This study was performed with the aim of comparing the effect of face-to-face education and educational booklet on health-related quality of life in patients suffering from type 2 diabetes.
Materials and Methods: In this clinical trial study, which was conducted in 2017, 120 patients qualified to enter the study were selected by random sampling; they were randomly allocated to 3 groups, including, face-to-face group, education through booklet, and control group. The data were collected through Diabetes Quality of Life-Brief Clinical Inventory (DQL-BCI). Patients in the two intervention groups were presented with materials with the same educational content, but different teaching methods. The data were analyzed by SPSS 21, using Chi-square, one-way analysis of variance, paired t-test, and Tukey's post hoc test.
Findings: Before intervention, mean score of health-related quality of life in patients in the 3 groups was not statistically significant (p=0.1). After intervention, there was a significant difference between the mean score of health-related quality of life of patients in intervention groups and control group (p=0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the patients in face-to-face and education through booklet groups (p>0.05).
Conclusion: The effect of face-to-face education and educational booklet on health-related quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes is the same.
R. Taheri, A.k. Alamdari, A. Afrasiabi Far, M.l. Rastian,
Volume 2, Issue 3 (9-2021)
Abstract
Aims: Diabetes can be controlled by exercise, diet, and medication regimen, and training is essential for adherence to regimen therapy. This study aimed to compare the effect of training by face-to-face method and educational booklet on adherence to regimen therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Materials & Methods: This clinical trial study was carried out on 120 eligible patients. The subjects were selected by available sampling and classified into three groups: two intervention groups and a control group. The demographic information form and the diabetes adherence questionnaire were used to collect the information. Patients in the two intervention groups have received the intervention with the same content but different teaching methods. Data were analyzed by SPSS 21 software using Chi-square, analysis of variance, paired T, and Tukey tests.
Findings: There was no statistically significant difference between the three groups in the mean scores of adherence to the regimen therapy and all its dimensions such as diet regimen, exercise regime, and medication regimen, before the intervention (p>0.05), but a significant difference was observed between the mean scores of diet regimen and exercise regime between the groups, after the intervention (p<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the study groups in the mean adherence score to the medication regimen (p>0.05).
Conclusion: Both face-to-face training and educational booklet were able to improve the dimensions of adherence to the treatment regimen in diabetes. However, the effect of face-to-face training and educational booklet on the dimensions of adherence to the treatment regimen was the same.
Sh. Nikooe, H. Ghasemi, M. R. Zarei, H. Vakilpour, B. Alipoor,
Volume 3, Issue 4 (12-2022)
Abstract
Aims: Several studies investigated the association of ACE I/D polymorphism with the risk and severity of COVID-19 infection. However, the information in each of the published studies is limited, and the results were inconsistent or even contradictory. Accordingly, this meta-analysis evaluated the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and COVID-19 susceptibility and severity.
Materials & Methods: Two investigators independently searched the PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Science Direct databases. Five studies including 1029 cases and 3561 controls were retrieved to evaluate the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and the risk of COVID-19. Furthermore, a meta-analysis of the correlation between the ACE I/D variant and the severity of infection covered 5 case-control studies, including 264 sever-cases and 447 mild cases.
Findings: There was no association between the ACE I/D variant in all genetic models and COVID-19 susceptibility. However, our analysis revealed that there was a significant association between ACE I/D variant in the allele contrast (95% CI=0.5291-0.8353; p<0.001), recessive (95% CI=0.4268-0.9172; p=0.01) and dominant (95% CI=0.3974-0.8092; p=0.001) models and severity of COVID-19.
Conclusion: ACE I/D polymorphism is associated with the severity of COVID-19 infection. There is no association between the ACE I/D variant in all genetic models and COVID-19 susceptibility.
M. Gharaghani, Z. Ashrafzade, D. Razmjoue, H. Sadeghi Mansourkhani, M. Salahi, H. Yousefi Mehryan, T. Talaie, S. Nouripour-Sisakht,
Volume 4, Issue 1 (3-2023)
Abstract
