ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: General surgeons are required in only a minority of trauma call cases to assess for abdominal injuries. Computed tomography (CT) accurately detects blunt abdominal injuries and may have replaced the need for general surgeons at trauma calls. This study evaluated the role of general surgeons at trauma calls and assessed use of CT in cases of suspected abdominal trauma. METHODS: (a) Eighteen month analysis of trauma calls at a district general hospital and (b) three month prospective study of all trauma cases presenting to A&E. RESULTS: (a) There were 73 trauma calls and the mechanism of injury in most cases was a road traffic accident (RTA). Most patients had orthopaedic and/or neurosurgical injuries. The general surgeons assessed 22 trauma call patients. Abdominal injury was excluded in 13 (four by clinical examination and nine following CT). (b) Forty three patients fulfilled the criteria for a trauma call and 14 trauma calls were made. The mechanism of injury in most was RTA and most had orthopaedic and/or neurosurgical injuries. The general surgeons assessed 10/43 potential trauma call patients, and abdominal injury was excluded in five (one by clinical examination and four following CT). CONCLUSION: A&E staff managed most trauma calls. Most patients did not require general surgical intervention. For penetrating injuries, presence of a general surgeon remained crucial. For blunt injuries CT was an important adjunct. These data suggest that general surgeons do not routinely have to attend all trauma calls but can be called if abdominal and/or vascular injuries are specifically suspected.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , General Surgery/organization & administration , Wounds and Injuries/therapy , Abdominal Injuries/diagnostic imaging , Abdominal Injuries/etiology , Abdominal Injuries/surgery , Accidents, Traffic , England , Health Services Research/methods , Hospitals, District/organization & administration , Hospitals, General/organization & administration , Humans , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Patient Selection , Physician's Role , Prospective Studies , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Triage/organization & administration , Wounds and Injuries/etiology , Wounds and Injuries/surgery , Wounds, Nonpenetrating/diagnostic imaging , Wounds, Nonpenetrating/etiology , Wounds, Nonpenetrating/surgeryABSTRACT
AIM: To assess effects of acute ethanol intake on the pharmacokinetics of isoniazid in healthy male volunteers. METHODS: Sixteen healthy male, drug-free subjects were studied. Each received in the fasting state, on two occasions separated by at least 1 week, isoniazid (200 mg orally). On one occasion (assigned randomly), subjects received ethanol 0.73 g/kg, 1 h before isoniazid, followed by 0.11 g/kg ethanol orally every hour thereafter for 7 h. Plasma isoniazid and acetylisoniazid concentrations were measured by means of high-performance liquid chromatography. Blood ethanol concentrations were measured hourly by breath analysis. Plasma concentrations of isoniazid and acetylisoniazid were analysed using TOPFIT software. RESULTS: Peak concentrations of isoniazid were reached within 90 min, in both the ethanol-treated and control groups. The ethanol dosage regimen used resulted in peak blood ethanol concentrations between 78 mg/l and 103 mg/l. There was no significant difference in area under the curve, half-life of elimination or the ratio of acetylisoniazid to isoniazid (AcINH/INH) in the sample withdrawn 3 h after isoniazid dose. Acetylator phenotype for patients was the same in both phases, whether assessed by half-life of isoniazid or the AcINH/INH ratio at 3 h. CONCLUSIONS: Acute ethanol intake at this dose is unlikely to affect results of acetylation studies in which isoniazid is used as a substrate, whether the half-life of isoniazid or the AcINH /INH ratio at 3 h is used to phenotype patients.
