ABSTRACT
Intentional ingestion of a foreign body in adults is a rare clinical presentation. This case is one of a 27-year-old Sudanese man who presented having swallowed a ballpoint pen intentionally. Clinical examination and plain chest radiograph exhibited no signs indicative of perforation with only a raised C reactive protein identified on blood tests. Subsequent gastroscopy revealed that the pen had simultaneously perforated the duodenum at both D1 and D3 requiring removal via a laparotomy. The patient fully recovered and was discharged 2 weeks postoperatively following psychiatric input.
Subject(s)
Duodenal Ulcer/diagnosis , Foreign Bodies/diagnosis , Intestinal Perforation/diagnosis , Adult , Diagnosis, Differential , Duodenal Ulcer/complications , Duodenal Ulcer/diagnostic imaging , Duodenal Ulcer/surgery , Foreign Bodies/complications , Foreign Bodies/diagnostic imaging , Foreign Bodies/surgery , Humans , Intestinal Perforation/complications , Intestinal Perforation/diagnostic imaging , Intestinal Perforation/surgery , Laparotomy , Male , Tomography, X-Ray ComputedABSTRACT
The internet is commonly used by patients to access medical information, particularly where new treatments become available and are highlighted in the press. There is however, no regulation of the quality or accuracy of the information presented on web sites. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality and accuracy of the information concerning the aromatase inhibitors (AIs). The three most popular search engines: Google, Yahoo, and MSN were utilized. The top ten "hits" for the generic and proprietary names of each AIs: anastrozole (Arimidex), exemestane (Aromasin), and letrozole (Femara) were evaluated using a 12-point score by a single assessor. The accuracy of the information provided was compared with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines. The mean score for the 180 web sites was only 6.13 out of 12 (0-11). If we consider a score of 9 or more out of 12 (> or =75%) for a web site to represent good quality information, then 51 (28%) of pages scored well. Google was slightly better than Yahoo and MSN; with the highest percentage of web sites scoring well. In evaluating hits according to type of web sites, 50 (28%) were charity web sites and 30 (17%) were drug company web sites and both groups scored significantly higher than the overall mean (charity p = 0.014, drug company p = 0.001). Only 2 of 180 hits gave accurate statistical evidence regarding the benefits of AIs over tamoxifen. We have found that the quality and accuracy of information concerning AIs provided on the Internet is poor and patients using it are unlikely to find accurate information. It is therefore our duty as healthcare providers to guide patients, so as to avoid them from being overwhelmed by irrelevant and conflicting information.
