ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has shown remarkable adaptation in wound management worldwide. Numerous studies have provided evidence that demonstrates both the medical and financial advantages of NPWT. In this study, the VAC Therapy System, one of the leading commercially used NPWT systems, has been utilized to treat patients with either acute or chronic wounds requiring surgical intervention, with the aim of demonstrating the efficacy of using a modified version of the VAC system while reducing the total associated cost. METHOD: The patients were divided into two randomly selected groups using randomization generator software. A modification was made by replacing the disposable canister provided by Kinetic Concepts Inc., with an alternative reusable canister (Baxter, Inc.); one group was assigned to use the conventional VAC Therapy System, and the other was assigned to use the modified version. Our study aimed to investigate whether this modification would lower the cost of the VAC Therapy System while still achieving the desired outcome. RESULTS: The VAC Therapy System contributed to improving the wound bed score in both groups, which supports previous findings on the effectiveness of NPWT while reflecting that the modification did not negatively impact the functionality and the integrity of the VAC Therapy System. Furthermore, the average daily consumables cost was markedly reduced in the modified group compared with the standard group, which reduced the overall cost of treatment. CONCLUSION: It is possible to use the VAC Therapy System to its full advantage, while minimizing the financial burden of using it.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Understanding the risk factors responsible for the increased infection among HCWs can mitigate the transmission of COVID-19 among HCWs and patients alike. The aim of this study is to evaluate factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare Workers. METHODS: Healthcare workers and hospital administrators were asked to participate in this cross-sectional survey study that was conducted in Jaber Al Ahmad Hospital (JAH) between August to October 2020. Participants were invited to undergo SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody testing and to complete a questionnaire targeted to factors that may be associated with acquisition of SARS-CoV-2. Descriptive analysis and multivariate logistic regression were done. RESULTS: 847 healthcare workers participated in the study and 20.5% of them had previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The average age of participants was 35.7 years (SD = 7.9); 52.4% were female, and 55.8% were doctors. Multivariate analysis showed that working as a nurse (adjusted OR 1.77, 95% CI = 1.15, 2.71), and wearing gloves (adjusted OR 2.93, 95% CI = 1.19, 7.22) were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of contracting SARS-CoV-2 infection while controlling for other factors. Most personal protective equipment (PPE) were reported to be available always or most of the time, with the least available PPE item being coveralls (74.4%). CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for confounding factors, being a nurse and prolonged glove use were associated with increased likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Prospective cohort studies are required to further elucidate the reasons for our findings in order to minimize the transmission of infection among healthcare workers.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel , Hospitals , Humans , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical condition presented in emergency departments worldwide. Clinical scoring systems, such as the Alvarado and modified Alvarado scoring systems, were developed with the goal of reducing the negative appendectomy rate to 5%-10%. The Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) scoring system was established in 2008 specifically for Asian populations. The aim of this study was to compare the modified Alvarado with the RIPASA scoring system in Kuwait population. METHODS: This study included 180 patients who underwent appendectomies and were documented as having "acute appendicitis" or "abdominal pain" in the operating theatre logbook (unit B) from November 2014 to March 2016. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), diagnostic accuracy, predicted negative appendectomy and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the modified Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems were derived using SPSS statistical software. RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were included in this study according to our criteria. The cut-off threshold point of the modified Alvarado score was set at 7.0, which yielded a sensitivity of 82.8% and a specificity of 56%. The PPV was 89.3% and the NPV was 42.4%. The cut-off threshold point of the RIPASA score was set at 7.5, which yielded a 94.5% sensitivity and an 88% specificity. The PPV was 97.2% and the NPV was 78.5%. The predicted negative appendectomy rates were 10.7% and 2.2% for the modified Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems, respectively. The negative appendectomy rate decreased significantly, from 18.4% to 10.7% for the modified Alvarado, and to 2.2% for the RIPASA scoring system, which was a significant difference (P<0.001) for both scoring systems. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, the RIPASA score is a simple scoring system with better sensitivity and specificity than the modified Alvarado scoring system in Asian populations. It consists of 14 clinical parameters that can be obtained from a good patient history, clinical examination and laboratory investigations. The RIPASA scoring system is more accurate and specific than the modified Alvarado scoring system for Kuwait population.
ABSTRACT
@#BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical condition presented in emergency departments worldwide. Clinical scoring systems, such as the Alvarado and modified Alvarado scoring systems, were developed with the goal of reducing the negative appendectomy rate to 5%–10%. The Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Appendicitis (RIPASA) scoring system was established in 2008 specifically for Asian populations. The aim of this study was to compare the modified Alvarado with the RIPASA scoring system in Kuwait population. METHODS: This study included 180 patients who underwent appendectomies and were documented as having "acute appendicitis" or "abdominal pain" in the operating theatre logbook (unit B) from November 2014 to March 2016. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), diagnostic accuracy, predicted negative appendectomy and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the modified Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems were derived using SPSS statistical software. RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were included in this study according to our criteria. The cut-off threshold point of the modified Alvarado score was set at 7.0, which yielded a sensitivity of 82.8% and a specificity of 56%. The PPV was 89.3% and the NPV was 42.4%. The cut-off threshold point of the RIPASA score was set at 7.5, which yielded a 94.5% sensitivity and an 88% specificity. The PPV was 97.2% and the NPV was 78.5%. The predicted negative appendectomy rates were 10.7% and 2.2% for the modified Alvarado and RIPASA scoring systems, respectively. The negative appendectomy rate decreased significantly, from 18.4% to 10.7% for the modified Alvarado, and to 2.2% for the RIPASA scoring system, which was a significant difference (P<0.001) for both scoring systems. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, the RIPASA score is a simple scoring system with better sensitivity and specificity than the modified Alvarado scoring system in Asian populations. It consists of 14 clinical parameters that can be obtained from a good patient history, clinical examination and laboratory investigations. The RIPASA scoring system is more accurate and specific than the modified Alvarado scoring system for Kuwait population.
