Browsing by Author "Ozkan G."

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Asthma control test via text messaging: Could it be a tool for evaluating asthma control?
    (2013) Uysal M.A.; Mungan D.; Yorgancioglu A.; Yildiz F.; Akgun M.; Gemicioglu B.; Turktas H.; Ozkan G.; Yilmaz I.; Incioglu M.; Boyaci H.; Atis S.; Yalcin A.; Bayram N.G.; Deveci F.; Pulur D.; Ozgur E.S.; Dursun B.; Bulbul Y.; Sulu E.; Yilmaz V.
    Introduction: Originally, the Asthma Control Test (ACT) was designed for English-speaking patients using a paper-and-pencil format. The Turkish version of the ACT was recently validated. This article compares the paper-and-pencil and web-based texting formats of the Turkish version of the ACT and evaluates the compatibility of these ACT scores with GINA-based physician assessments of asthma control. Methods: This multicentre prospective study included 431 asthma patients from outpatient clinics in Turkey. The patients were randomized into a paper-and-pencil group (n=220) and a text messaging group (n=211). Patients completed the ACT at Visit 1, after 10±2 days, and at 5±1 week to demonstrate the reliability and responsiveness of the test. At each visit, physicians assessed patients' asthma control levels. Results: The ACT administered via texting showed an internal consistency of 0.82. For the texting group, we found a significant correlation between the ACT and physician assessments at Visit 1 (r=0.60, p<0.001). The AUC was 0.87, with a sensitivity of 78.0% and a specificity of 77.5% for a score of ≤19 for screening "uncontrolled" asthma in the texting group. Conclusion: When the Turkish version of the ACT was administered via either the paper-and-pencil or text messaging test, scores were closely associated with physician assessments of asthma control. © 2013 Informa Healthcare USA, Inc.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Epidemiology and distribution of interstitial lung diseases in Turkey
    (2014) Musellim B.; Okumus G.; Uzaslan E.; Akgün M.; Cetinkaya E.; Turan O.; Akkoclu A.; Hazar A.; Kokturk N.; Calisir H.C.; Sever F.; Kiter G.; Celik G.; Bilgin S.; Kurutepe M.; Uzun O.; Tabak L.; Ozdemir O.; Turker H.; Ogus C.; Kiral N.; Ozkan M.; Yalniz E.; Camsari G.; Dogan T.; Yilmaz U.; Cildag O.; Yildiz F.; Hanta I.; Oztuna F.; Arik D.; Goktalay T.; Kanmaz D.; Yilmaz V.; Altiay G.; Komurcuoglu B.; Ozkan G.; Erbaycu A.; Dogrul M.I.; Ongen G.; Tuncay E.; Dabak G.; Sakar A.; Bircan A.; Uzel I.; Kalpaklioglu F.; Gülbay B; Bulbul Y.; Gulbanu H.; Havlucu Y.; Ekici Z.; Zamani A.; Caglayan B.; Kayacan O.; Dursunoglu N.
    Introduction: There is very few data on the epidemiological features of interstitial lung diseases (ILD) in the literature. These studies on this subject suffer from limited number of patients. Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the epidemiological features of ILD in Turkey. Methods: Fifty-four investigators, 31 centres in 19 cities from six regions of Turkey, participated in the study. Two thousand two hundred forty-five newly diagnosed patients (51.8% females), led by Turkish Thoracic Society Clinical Problems Study Group, enrolled in this prospective study. Results: The mean age was 51.8±16.7 years. The mean age among males was 50.5±18.6 years and 53.0±14.6 years among females (P<0.001). 23.8% of the cases had ILD with known causes, while 39.4% were in granulomatous group, 23.7% were idiopathic, and 4.4% were in the unclassified group. Overall, histopathologically confirmed diagnosis rate was 40.4%. Sarcoidosis was the most common disease (37%), whereas cases with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) constituted 19,9% of patients. 53% of the sarcoidosis patients were females, and the ratio reaches to 75% under 50 years of age (for this group, IPF ratio is %3). In contrast, sarcoidosis and IPF ratios were equal in males (25%). Sarcoidosis was 8% in men over 50, while IPF was %45. Conclusion: The overall incidence of ILD in Turkey was computed to be 25.8/100000. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The predictors of COVID-19 mortality in a nationwide cohort of Turkish patients
    (W.B. Saunders Ltd, 2021) Kokturk N.; Babayigit C.; Kul S.; Duru Cetinkaya P.; Atis Nayci S.; Argun Baris S.; Karcioglu O.; Aysert P.; Irmak I.; Akbas Yuksel A.; Sekibag Y.; Baydar Toprak O.; Azak E.; Mulamahmutoglu S.; Cuhadaroglu C.; Demirel A.; Kerget B.; Baran Ketencioglu B.; Ozger H.S.; Ozkan G.; Ture Z.; Ergan B.; Avkan Oguz V.; Kilinc O.; Ercelik M.; Ulukavak Ciftci T.; Alici O.; Nurlu Temel E.; Ataoglu O.; Aydin A.; Cetiner Bahcetepe D.; Gullu Y.T.; Fakili F.; Deveci F.; Kose N.; Tor M.M.; Gunluoglu G.; Altin S.; Turgut T.; Tuna T.; Ozturk O.; Dikensoy O.; Yildiz Gulhan P.; Basyigit I.; Boyaci H.; Oguzulgen I.K.; Borekci S.; Gemicioglu B.; Bayraktar F.; Elbek O.; Hanta I.; Kuzu Okur H.; Sagcan G.; Uzun O.; Akgun M.; Altinisik G.; Dursun B.; Cakir Edis E.; Gulhan E.; Oner Eyuboglu F.; Gultekin O.; Havlucu Y.; Ozkan M.; Sakar Coskun A.; Sayiner A.; Kalyoncu A.F.; Itil O.; Bayram H.
    The COVID-19-related death rate varies between countries and is affected by various risk factors. This multicenter registry study was designed to evaluate the mortality rate and the related risk factors in Turkey. We retrospectively evaluated 1500 adults with COVID-19 from 26 centers who were hospitalized between March 11 and July 31, 2020. In the study group, 1041 and 459 cases were diagnosed as definite and highly probable cases, respectively. There were 993 PCR-positive cases (66.2%). Among all cases, 1144 (76.3%) were diagnosed with non-severe pneumonia, whereas 212 (14.1%) had severe pneumonia. Death occurred in 67 patients, corresponding to a mortality rate of 4.5% (95% CI:3.5–5.6). The univariate analysis demonstrated that various factors, including male sex, age ≥65 years and the presence of dyspnea or confusion, malignity, chronic obstructive lung disease, interstitial lung disease, immunosuppressive conditions, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, and sepsis, were positively associated with mortality. Favipiravir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin were not associated with survival. Following multivariate analysis, male sex, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, malignancy, sepsis and interstitial lung diseases were found to be independent risk factors for mortality. Among the biomarkers, procalcitonin levels on the 3rd-5th days of admission showed the strongest associations with mortality (OR: 6.18; 1.6–23.93). This study demonstrated that the mortality rate in hospitalized patients in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic was a serious threat and that those patients with male sex, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, malignancy, sepsis and interstitial lung diseases were at increased risk of mortality; therefore, such patients should be closely monitored. © 2021 Elsevier Ltd
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    COVID-19: vaccination vs. hospitalization
    (Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH, 2022) Uzun O.; Akpolat T.; Varol A.; Turan S.; Bektas S.G.; Cetinkaya P.D.; Dursun M.; Bakan N.; Ketencioglu B.B.; Bayrak M.; Baris S.A.; Guner R.; Gunal O.; Nural S.; Deniz P.P.; Toprak O.B.; Ozkan G.; Gumus A.; Kerget F.; Ercelik M.; Ataoglu O.; Yuksel A.; Ates G.; Kutsoylu O.E.; Kose N.; Kizilirmak D.; Keskin S.; Gultekin O.; Coskun N.; Yilmaz E.S.; Uslu S.; Basyigit İ.; Ergan B.; Deveci F.; Yakar M.N.; Zuhur C.; Sagcan G.; Yuce Z.T.; Kuluozturk M.; Sezgin M.E.; Sezgin E.N.A.; Havlucu Y.; Cuhadaroglu C.; Kilinc O.; Boyaci H.; Altunay H.; Akti M.; Dursun Z.B.; Kalem A.K.; Isik S.A.; Akyildiz L.; Aykac N.; Almaz M.S.; Kokturk N.; Itil O.
    Objective: Vaccination is the most efficient way to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but vaccination rates remain below the target level in most countries. This multicenter study aimed to evaluate the vaccination status of hospitalized patients and compare two different booster vaccine protocols. Setting: Inoculation in Turkey began in mid-January 2021. Sinovac was the only available vaccine until April 2021, when BioNTech was added. At the beginning of July 2021, the government offered a third booster dose to healthcare workers and people aged > 50 years who had received the two doses of Sinovac. Of the participants who received a booster, most chose BioNTech as the third dose. Methods: We collected data from 25 hospitals in 16 cities. Patients hospitalized between August 1 and 10, 2021, were included and categorized into eight groups according to their vaccination status. Results: We identified 1401 patients, of which 529 (37.7%) were admitted to intensive care units. Nearly half (47.8%) of the patients were not vaccinated, and those with two doses of Sinovac formed the second largest group (32.9%). Hospitalizations were lower in the group which received 2 doses of Sinovac and a booster dose of BioNTech than in the group which received 3 doses of Sinovac. Conclusion: Effective vaccinations decreased COVID-19-related hospitalizations. The efficacy after two doses of Sinovac may decrease over time; however, it may be enhanced by adding a booster dose. Moreover, unvaccinated patients may be persuaded to undergo vaccination. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The association of antiviral drugs with COVID-19 morbidity: The retrospective analysis of a nationwide COVID-19 cohort
    (Frontiers Media S.A., 2022) Babayigit C.; Kokturk N.; Kul S.; Cetinkaya P.D.; Atis Nayci S.; Argun Baris S.; Karcioglu O.; Aysert P.; Irmak I.; Akbas Yuksel A.; Sekibag Y.; Baydar Toprak O.; Azak E.; Mulamahmutoglu S.; Cuhadaroglu C.; Demirel A.; Kerget B.; Baran Ketencioglu B.; Ozger H.S.; Ozkan G.; Ture Z.; Ergan B.; Avkan Oguz V.; Kilinc O.; Ercelik M.; Ulukavak Ciftci T.; Alici O.; Nurlu Temel E.; Ataoglu O.; Aydin A.; Cetiner Bahcetepe D.; Gullu Y.T.; Fakili F.; Deveci F.; Kose N.; Tor M.M.; Gunluoglu G.; Altin S.; Turgut T.; Tuna T.; Ozturk O.; Dikensoy O.; Yildiz Gulhan P.; Basyigit I.; Boyaci H.; Oguzulgen I.K.; Borekci S.; Gemicioglu B.; Bayraktar F.; Elbek O.; Hanta I.; Kuzu Okur H.; Sagcan G.; Uzun O.; Akgun M.; Altinisik G.; Dursun B.; Cakir Edis E.; Gulhan E.; Oner Eyuboglu F.; Gultekin O.; Havlucu Y.; Ozkan M.; Sakar Coskun A.; Sayiner A.; Kalyoncu A.F.; Itil O.; Bayram H.
    Background and objectives: Although several repurposed antiviral drugs have been used for the treatment of COVID-19, only a few such as remdesivir and molnupiravir have shown promising effects. The objectives of our study were to investigate the association of repurposed antiviral drugs with COVID-19 morbidity. Methods: Patients admitted to 26 different hospitals located in 16 different provinces between March 11–July 18, 2020, were enrolled. Case definition was based on WHO criteria. Patients were managed according to the guidelines by Scientific Board of Ministry of Health of Turkey. Primary outcomes were length of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) requirement, and intubation. Results: We retrospectively evaluated 1,472 COVID-19 adult patients; 57.1% were men (mean age = 51.9 ± 17.7years). A total of 210 (14.3%) had severe pneumonia, 115 (7.8%) were admitted to ICUs, and 69 (4.7%) were intubated during hospitalization. The median (interquartile range) of duration of hospitalization, including ICU admission, was 7 (5–12) days. Favipiravir (n = 328), lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 55), and oseltamivir (n = 761) were administered as antiviral agents, and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ, n = 1,382) and azithromycin (n = 738) were used for their immunomodulatory activity. Lopinavir/ritonavir (β [95% CI]: 4.71 [2.31–7.11]; p = 0.001), favipiravir (β [95% CI]: 3.55 [2.56–4.55]; p = 0.001) and HCQ (β [95% CI]: 0.84 [0.02–1.67]; p = 0.046) were associated with increased risk of lengthy hospital stays. Furthermore, favipiravir was associated with increased risks of ICU admission (OR [95% CI]: 3.02 [1.70–5.35]; p = 0.001) and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement (OR [95% CI]: 2.94 [1.28–6.75]; p = 0.011). Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated that antiviral drugs including lopinavir, ritonavir, and favipiravir were associated with negative clinical outcomes such as increased risks for lengthy hospital stay, ICU admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement. Therefore, repurposing such agents without proven clinical evidence might not be the best approach for COVID-19 treatment. Copyright © 2022 Babayigit, Kokturk, Kul, Cetinkaya, Atis Nayci, Argun Baris, Karcioglu, Aysert, Irmak, Akbas Yuksel, Sekibag, Baydar Toprak, Azak, Mulamahmutoglu, Cuhadaroglu, Demirel, Kerget, Baran Ketencioglu, Ozger, Ozkan, Ture, Ergan, Avkan Oguz, Kilinc, Ercelik, Ulukavak Ciftci, Alici, Nurlu Temel, Ataoglu, Aydin, Cetiner Bahcetepe, Gullu, Fakili, Deveci, Kose, Tor, Gunluoglu, Altin, Turgut, Tuna, Ozturk, Dikensoy, Yildiz Gulhan, Basyigit, Boyaci, Oguzulgen, Borekci, Gemicioglu, Bayraktar, Elbek, Hanta, Kuzu Okur, Sagcan, Uzun, Akgun, Altinisik, Dursun, Cakir Edis, Gulhan, Oner Eyuboglu, Gultekin, Havlucu, Ozkan, Sakar Coskun, Sayiner, Kalyoncu, Itil and Bayram.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    COVID-19: booster(s) vs. hospitalization and Intensive Care Unit admission
    (Verduci Editore s.r.l, 2023) Toprak O.B.; Akpolat T.; Uzun O.; Pinar Deniz P.; Kokturk N.; Varol A.; Guzel E.; Ercelik M.; Gultekin O.; Guner R.; Turan S.; Gökbulut Bektaş Ş.; Coskun N.; Bakan N.; Nuri Yakar M.; Eren Kutsoylu O.; Ergan B.; Argun Bariş S.; Başyiğit İ.; Boyaci H.; Çetinkaya F.; Çolak H.; Aykac N.; Baran Ketencioğlu B.; Türe Yüce Z.; Akkaya Isik S.; Serap Yilmaz E.; Karaoğlanoğlu S.; Berik Safci S.; Ozkan G.; Kose N.; Kizilirmak D.; Havlucu Y.; Nural S.; Kerget F.; Sunal Ö.; Yuksel A.; Bestepe Dursun Z.; Deveci F.; Kuluozturk M.; Ataoglu O.; Dursun M.; Keskin S.; Emin Sezgin M.; Aktepe Sezgin E.N.; Eser F.; Akyildiz L.; Selim Almaz M.; Kayaaslan B.; Hasanoğlu İ.; Bayrak M.; Gümüş A.; Sağcan G.; Cuhadaroglu C.; Kucuk H.; Onyilmaz T.; Mete B.; Kilinc O.; Oya Itil B.
    OBJECTIVE: As the pandemic continues, different vaccine protocols have been implemented to maintain the protection of vaccines and to provide protection against new variants. The aim of this study was to assess hospitalized patients' vaccination status and document the efficacy of boosters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The patients that were hospitalized due to COVID-19 were enrolled from 28 hospitals in Turkey for five months from September 2021. 5,331 confirmed COVID-19 patients from collaborating centers were randomly enrolled to understand/estimate the distribution of vaccination status in hospitalized patients and to compare the efficacy of vaccination/booster protocols. RESULTS: 2,779 men and 2,552 women of which 2,408 (45.2%) were admitted to Intensive Care Units participated in this study. It was found that the highest risk reduction for all age groups was found in groups that received 4 doses. Four doses of vaccination for every 3.7 people under 50 years of age, for every 5.7 people in the 50-64 age group, and for every 4.3 people over 65 years of age will prevent 1 patient from being admitted to intensive care. Regardless of the type of vaccine, it was found that the risk of ICU hospitalization decreased in those who were vaccinated compared to those who were not vaccinated. Regardless of the type of vaccine, the ICU risk was found to decrease 1.25-fold in those who received 1 or 2 doses of vaccine, 1.18-fold in those who received 3 doses, and 3.26-fold in those who received 4 doses. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that the addition of a fourth dose is more effective in preventing intensive unit care even in disadvantaged. © 2023 Verduci Editore s.r.l. All rights reserved.