Search

Abstract: Background: Androgenetic alopecia is one of the most common forms of hair loss. Alopecia areata is a common autoimmune disorder which causes hair loss. It has been previously reported that both alopecia disorders can have negative effects on quality of life. However, only a few studies have compared the effects of the two disorders. Objective: The aim is to show the impact of alopecia on patients' quality of life and compare patients with androgenetic alopecia and alopecia areata. Methods: 82 androgenetic alopecia and 56 alopecia areata patients were recruited. All patients were evaluated with the Hairdex scale and dermatology quality of life instrument in Turkish (TQL), and the scores were statistically compared according to age, sex, employment and education status, and severity of illness in the two groups. Also, female patients were statistically evaluated according to whether they wore headscarves. Results: Androgenetic alopecia patients had significantly higher total Hairdex scores in terms of emotions, functioning, and symptoms, while self-confidence was significantly higher in the alopecia areata patients. No significant differences were found in stigmatization or TQL scores between groups. The Hairdex scale and TQL scores did not show differences between the groups in terms of wearing headscarves. Study limitations: The validity and reliability of the Hairdex index have not been established in Turkey. Conclusions: Based on the Hairdex scale, our findings revealed that androgenetic alopecia patients are more affected by their disorder than alopecia areata patients. Although androgenetic alopecia is common and neither life-threatening nor painful, it is a stressful disorder with increased need for improvement in the patient's quality of life.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This is a prospective, randomized, single-blind study. We aimed to compare the tracheal intubation conditions and hemodynamic responses either remifentanil or a combination of remifentanil and lidocaine with sevoflurane induction in the absence of neuromuscular blocking agents. METHODS: Fifty intellectually disabled, American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II patients who underwent tooth extraction under outpatient general anesthesia were included in this study. Patients were randomized to receive either 2 μg kg-1 remifentanil (Group 1, n = 25) or a combination of 2 μg kg-1 remifentanil and 1 mg kg-1 lidocaine (Group 2, n = 25). To evaluate intubation conditions, Helbo-Hansen scoring system was used. In patients who scored 2 points or less in all scorings, intubation conditions were considered acceptable, however if any of the scores was greater than 2, intubation conditions were regarded unacceptable. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) were recorded at baseline, after opioid administration, before intubation, and at 1, 3, and 5 min after intubation. RESULTS: Acceptable intubation parameters were achieved in 24 patients in Group 1 (96%) and in 23 patients in Group 2 (92%). In intra-group comparisons, the heart rate and mean arterial pressure values at all-time points in both groups showed a significant decrease compared to baseline values (p = 0.000) CONCLUSION: By the addition of 2 μg/kg remifentanil during sevoflurane induction, successful tracheal intubation can be accomplished without using muscle relaxants in intellectually disabled patients who undergo outpatient dental extraction. Also worth noting, the addition of 1 mg/kg lidocaine to 2 μg/kg remifentanil does not provide any additional improvement in the intubation parameters.