Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Compliance in Turkey: Data from the Prospective, Observational, Multicenter Survey Including 7,978 Surgical Patients.

Background: Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) is the peri-operative administration of antimicrobial agents. Compliance rates vary worldwide from 15% to 84.3%, with studies in Turkey not exceeding 35%. The aim of this multicenter study was to determine the rate of appropriate antibiotic class, timing, and duration as well as discharge prescriptions in Turkey. Thus, we aimed to determine the rate of full compliance with SAP procedures in our country Patients and Methods: This multicenter, prospective, observational, descriptive study was conducted in 47 hospitals from 28 provinces in seven different regions of Turkey. Patients over 18 years of age in all surgical units between June 6, 2022, and June 10, 2022, were included in the study. Results: Of the 7,978 patients included in the study, 332 were excluded from further analyses because of pre-existing infection, and SAP compliance analyses were performed on the remaining 7,646 cases. The antibiotic most commonly used for SAP was cefazolin (n = 4,701; 61.5%), followed by third-generation cephalosporins (n = 596; 7.8%). The most common time to start SAP was within 30 minutes before surgery (n = 2,252; 32.5%), followed by 30 to 60 minutes before surgery (n = 1,638; 23.6%). Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis duration was <24 hours in 3,516 (50.7%) patients and prolonged until discharge in 1,505 (21.7%) patients. Finally, the actual proportion of patients compliant with SAP was 19% (n = 1,452) after omitting 4,458 (58.3%) patients who were prescribed oral antibiotic agents at discharge as part of a prolonged SAP. Conclusions: Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis compliance rates are still very low in Turkey. Prolonged duration of SAP and especially high rate of antibiotic prescription at discharge are the main reasons for non-compliance with SAP.

The relationship between gluteus medius latent trigger point and muscle strength in healthy subjects.

INTRODUCTION: We hypothesized that latent MTrPs might decrease gluteus medius muscle strength in healthy individuals. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between latent MTrPs and gluteus medius muscle strength in a group of healthy adults. METHODS: Forty-eight healthy men were included in the study. Trigger point examination for the gluteus medius was performed bilaterally. Subjects with one or more trigger points on the dominant side and those without any trigger point were assigned to two groups. Muscle strength for the gluteus medius was assessed with a manual muscle tester using the "break test" technique on both sides. For statistical analysis, the independent sample t-test was used to compare the intergroup differences. RESULTS: The latent MTrP group demonstrated lower abduction muscle strength in the dominant gluteus medius. Moreover, the latent MTrP group showed higher abduction muscle strength in the non-dominant gluteus medius (p < 0.05). Intergroup comparison revealed that gluteus medius abduction muscle strength on the dominant side was higher in the non-latent MTrP group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Latent MTrP may cause joint movement limitation, overload by affecting motor activation patterns and reciprocal inhibition mechanisms. Outcomes of the current study revealed that gluteus medius abduction strength values below 9.7 kg could be associated with latent MTrP with high sensitivity and low specificity. It is imperative to note that the latent MTrP of gluteus medius muscle, which has a critical role in the lumbopelvic junction, should not be ignored in clinical practice, and treatment should be applied when detected.