ABSTRACT
Urinary catheterization is a common procedure in the care and treatment of hospitalized patients and bacteriuria is associated with complications and decreased quality of healthcare services. Applying any safe and cost benefit action to reduce or prevent it is of great importance which using the antiseptic solutions, is one of them. It seems that doing the procedure with clean method alike to sterile method is safe and using water is preferred to antiseptic solutions due to economical reasons, availability, and not having side effects. The present study was therefore conducted to compare the effects of water vs. povidone -iodine solution for periurethral cleaning prior to urinary catheterization on bacteriuria. A clinical trial study design was carried out with a sample of 60 hospitalized women drawn from gynecology unit of Shaheed Sadoughi Hospital in Yazd. They were selected through random sampling, and were allocated in two groups. After registering the participants' demographic data, the urine culture samples were sent to laboratory. The samples with more than 10[3] bacteriuria were recognized and the microorganisms were recorded. All statistics were computed by the SPSS software data. Overally, 18.3% of the participants had shown bacteriuria which was 20% using water and 16.7% using povidone -iodine solution. The difference between the groups wasn't significant [P=0.5]. The contributor microorganisms in water group were Stafilococco aureo [6.65%], escherichia coli [10%], Enterococcus [3.35%] and in povidone -iodine solution group were gram positive cocci [3.35%] estafilococo [3.35%], streptococ [3.35%] and escherichia coli [6.65%] which weren't significantly different [P=0.5]. The findings indicated that there were no significant differences between groups. It seemed that using povidone -iodine solution didn't reduce the rate of bacteriuria more than water. As applying water has no side effects and is more beneficial economically, it could be recommended for peri urethral cleaning prior to urinary catheterization in short term
ABSTRACT
Two important disadvantages of amalgam restorations are lack of adhesion to tooth structure and marginal leakage. In recent studies, the use of dentin adhesive on cavity walls before the insertion of amalgam proved to be the best method to reduce microleakage and increase chemical adhesion. Fourty premolar and molar teeth were collected and divided into two groups. The class V cavities were made at the buccal surfaces of the teeth [Depth 1. 5 mm, Length 3 mm and Width 2 mm]. All the angles of cavo-surfaces were Buttjoint. The teeth were then washed, cleaned, dried and randomly divided into 2 groups, the first group was coated with 2 layers of varnish. The second group was coated with adhesive resin system and then restored with amalgam. The teeth were kept in distilled water for 24 hours. The prepared surfaces were then polished and thermocycling was performed. All prepared surfaces were coated with nail varnish up to 0.5 mm around the restorative material. Further more each group was randomly divided into 2 subgroups, one group was kept in distilled water for 24 hours and the other group for 5 months. All groups were afterwards kept in 0.5% basic fuchsin solution for 24 hours. The teeth were then mounted in Acrylic resin, were cut into two halves from the centre of preparation with a diamond saw and checked by a stereomicroscope for determining the microleakage rate. Comparison between two groups showed degree of dye penetration into margins of restorations with Rely X ARC was lower than that of varnish. However no significant differences were observed among the groups except for occlusal margins after 24 hours and 5 months