Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common disease that is often under-diagnosed and under-treated in all ages. This is due to differences in morphology, diversity in clinical phenotypes, and differences in diagnosis and treatment of OSA in children and adults, even among individuals of the same age. Therefore, a personalized medicine approach to diagnosis and treatment of OSA is necessary for physicians in clinical practice. In children and adults without serious underlying medical conditions, polysomnography at sleep labs may be an inappropriate and inconvenient testing modality compared to home sleep apnea testing. In addition, the apnea–hypopnea index should not be considered as a single parameter for making treatment decisions. Thus, the treatment of OSA should be personalized and based on individual tolerance to sleep-quality-related parameters measured by the microarousal index, harmful effects of OSA on the cardiovascular system related to severe hypoxia, and patients’ comorbidities. The current treatment options for OSA include lifestyle modification, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, oral appliance, surgery, and other alternative treatments. CPAP therapy has been recommended as a cornerstone treatment for moderate-to-severe OSA in adults. However, not all patients can afford or tolerate CPAP therapy. This narrative review seeks to describe the current concepts and relevant approaches towards personalized management of patients with OSA, according to pathophysiology, cluster analysis of clinical characteristics, adequate combined therapy, and the consideration of patients’ expectations.

Treatment adherence (TA) is a critical issue and is under-investigated in hemodialysis patients. A multi-center study was conducted from July 2020 to March 2021 on 972 hemodialysis patients in eight hospitals in Vietnam to explore the factors associated with TA during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected, including socio-demographics, an End-Stage Renal Disease Adherence Questionnaire (ESRD-AQ), 12-item short-form health literacy questionnaire (HLS-SF12), 4-item digital healthy diet literacy scale (DDL), 10-item hemodialysis dietary knowledge scale (HDK), 7-item fear of COVID-19 scale (FCoV-19S), and suspected COVID-19 symptoms (S-COVID19-S). Bivariate and multivariate linear regression models were used to explore the associations. Higher DDL scores were associated with higher TA scores (regression coefficient, B, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 95%CI, 0.59, 2.12; p = 0.001). Higher FCoV-19S scores were associated with lower TA scores (B, −1.78; 95%CI, −3.33, −0.24; p = 0.023). In addition, patients aged 60–85 (B, 24.85; 95%CI, 6.61, 43.11; p = 0.008) with “very or fairly easy” medication payment ability (B, 27.92; 95%CI, 5.89, 44.95; p = 0.013) had higher TA scores. Patients who underwent hemodialysis for ≥5 years had a lower TA score than those who received <5 years of hemodialysis (B, −52.87; 95%CI, −70.46, −35.28; p < 0.001). These findings suggested that DDL and FCoV-19S, among other factors, should be considered in future interventions to improve TA in hemodialysis patients.

Osteoporosis is a common bone health disorder in hemodialysis patients that is linked with a higher morbidity and mortality rate. While previous studies have explored the associated factors of osteoporosis, there is a lack of studies investigating the impacts of health literacy (HL) and digital healthy diet literacy (DDL) on osteoporosis. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the associations of HL, DDL, and other factors with osteoporosis among hemodialysis patients. From July 2020 to March 2021, a cross-sectional study was conducted on 675 hemodialysis patients in eight hospitals in Vietnam. The data were collected by using the osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) and the 12-item short form of the health literacy questionnaire (HLS-SF12) on digital healthy diet literacy (DDL) and hemodialysis dietary knowledge (HDK). In addition, we also collected information about the socio-demographics, the clinical parameters, the biochemical parameters, and physical activity. Unadjusted and adjusted multinomial logistic regression models were utilized in order to investigate the associations. The proportion of patients at low, medium, and high levels of osteoporosis risk was 39.6%, 40.6%, and 19.8%, respectively. In the adjusted models, women had a higher likelihood of osteoporosis risk than men (odds ratio, OR, 3.46; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI, 1.86, 6.44; p < 0.001; and OR, 6.86; 95% CI, 2.96, 15.88; p < 0.001). The patients with rheumatoid arthritis (OR, 4.37; 95% CI, 1.67, 11.52; p = 0.003) and stomach ulcers (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.01, 3.77; p = 0.048) were more likely to have a higher likelihood of osteoporosis risk than those without. The patients who had a higher waist circumference (WC), HL, and DDL were less likely to have a medium level of osteoporosis risk (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92, 0.98; p = 0.004; OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88, 0.96; p < 0.001; OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93, 0.99; p = 0.017, respectively) and a high level of osteoporosis risk (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89, 0.97; p = 0.001; OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84, 0.94; p < 0.001; OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91, 0.99; p = 0.008, respectively) compared with a low level of osteoporosis risk and to those with a lower WC, HL, and DDL. In addition, higher levels of hemoglobin (Hb) (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66, 0.95; p = 0.014), hematocrit (Hct) (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92, 0.99; p = 0.041), albumin (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83, 0.99; p = 0.030), and education (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16, 0.88; p = 0.025) were associated with a lower likelihood of a high level of osteoporosis risk. In conclusion, osteoporosis risk is highly prevalent in hemodialysis patients. Improved HL, DDL, education, WC, albumin, Hb, and Hct levels should be considered in preventing hemodialysis patients from developing osteoporosis.

Objectives: The incidence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has increased, particularly among individuals who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Health literacy is considered a “social vaccine” that helps people respond effectively to the pandemic. We aimed to investigate the association between long COVID-19 and PTSD, and to examine the modifying role of health literacy in this association.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at 18 hospitals and health centers in Vietnam from December 2021 to October 2022. We recruited 4,463 individuals who had recovered from COVID-19 infection for at least 4 weeks. Participants provided information about their sociodemographics, clinical parameters, health-related behaviors, health literacy (using the 12-item short-form health literacy scale), long COVID-19 symptoms and PTSD (Impact Event Scale-Revised score of 33 or higher). Logistic regression models were used to examine associations and interactions.Results: Out of the study sample, 55.9% had long COVID-19 symptoms, and 49.6% had PTSD. Individuals with long COVID-19 symptoms had a higher likelihood of PTSD (odds ratio [OR], 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.63–2.12; p<0.001). Higher health literacy was associated with a lower likelihood of PTSD (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97–0.99; p=0.001). Compared to those with long COVID-19 symptoms and the lowest health literacy score, those with long COVID-19 symptoms and a 1-point health literacy increment had a 3% lower likelihood of PTSD (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96–0.99; p=0.001).Conclusion: Health literacy was found to be a protective factor against PTSD and modified the negative impact of long COVID-19 symptoms on PTSD.

Survivors of COVID-19 are susceptible to diminished health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and adverse psychological health, which may be exacerbated by their experiences of fear and the impact of the pandemic itself. This study aims to identify distinct fear and impact patterns related to the COVID-19 pandemic among survivors through latent profile analysis (LPA) and examine the associations of fear and impact patterns with post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and HRQoL. A total of 5,890 Vietnamese COVID-19 survivors completed the COVID-19 Impact Battery– Disability Scale (CIB-D), the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCoV-19 S), the Impact of Event Scale-Revised for PTSS, and the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) for HRQoL. Four distinct groups of fear and impact were identified: “Fearful and highly impacted” (26.8%), “moderately impacted yet not fearful” (22.9%), “less impacted and less fearful” (18.6%), and “mildly impacted and neutral” (31.7%). Survivors who were “less impacted and less fearful” exhibited significantly higher HRQoL scores (regression coefficient, B: 10.9; 95% confidence interval (CI): 10.0 − 11.7), both in terms of physical (B: 12.0; 95%CI: 11.1 − 12.9) and mental health (B: 19.4; 95%CI: 9.6 − 11.1), and lower PTSS levels (B: -24.5; 95%CI: -25.8 − -23.3) compared to those who were “highly impacted and fearful”. It is imperative to acknowledge the intricate association between fear, impact, and mental health to comprehensively address the diverse needs of this distinct population post-COVID-19. These findings provide insights for designing interventions and support mechanisms for COVID-19 survivors.

Insomnia is a prevalent sleep disorder worldwide, yet data among healthcare professionals in Southeast Asia remain limited. Occupational stressors, rotating shifts, and high emotional demands may increase vulnerability to sleep disturbance in this population. To estimate the prevalence of insomnia among Vietnamese healthcare professionals and to identify associated nocturnal symptoms, daytime impairments, and clinical associated factors. We conducted a nationwide multi-region cross-sectional survey of 1655 healthcare professionals across Vietnam. Participants completed a structured questionnaire assessing insomnia symptoms, daytime consequences, comorbidities, and occupational factors. Insomnia was ascertained per ICSD-3 criteria for chronic insomnia, requiring (i) ≥ 1 nocturnal symptom (DIMS: difficulty initiating sleep, difficulty maintaining sleep, or early-morning awakening); (ii) ≥ 1 associated daytime impairment; (iii) symptom frequency ≥ 3 nights/week; and (iv) chronicity ≥ 3 months, despite adequate sleep opportunity. Severity was evaluated using the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). Logistic regression models estimated odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for age, sex, occupation, marital status, and stimulant use. The prevalence of insomnia was 24.2% (95% CI, 22.2–26.3), higher in women than men and increasing with age. The most common nocturnal symptoms were nocturnal awakenings (84.2%) and sleep-onset difficulty (57.2%), while daytime impairments included memory complaints (74.6%), mood disturbances (55.4%), and excessive daytime sleepiness (59.5%). In multivariable analysis, independent associated factors of insomnia included nocturnal awakenings (aOR 6.11), sleep-onset difficulty (aOR 2.89), mood disturbance (aOR 2.20), morning headache (aOR 2.18), and memory impairment (aOR 1.63). Stimulant consumption, particularly tea or coffee (aOR 2.10) and alcohol (aOR 1.98), was also independently associated. Approximately one in four Vietnamese healthcare professionals experience insomnia, characterized by substantial nocturnal fragmentation and daytime dysfunction. Given its potential implications for clinician well-being and patient safety, systematic screening and integrated occupational sleep-health interventions are warranted.