Perceptions of Healthcare-Associated Infection and Antibiotic Resistance among Physicians Treating Syrian Patients with War-Related Injuries.

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) constitute a major contributor to morbidity and mortality worldwide, with a greater burden on low- and middle-income countries. War-related injuries generally lead to large tissue defects, with a high risk of infection. The aim of this study was to explore how physicians in a middle-income country in an emergency setting perceive HAI and antibiotic resistance (ABR). Ten physicians at a Jordanian hospital supported by Médecins Sans Frontières were interviewed face-to-face. The recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed by qualitative content analysis with an inductive and deductive approach. The participants acknowledged risk factors of HAI and ABR development, such as patient behavior, high numbers of injured patients, limited space, and non-compliance with hygiene protocols, but did not express a sense of urgency or any course of action. Overuse and misuse of antibiotics were reported as main contributors to ABR development, but participants expressed no direct interrelationship between ABR and HAI. We conclude that due to high patient load and limited resources, physicians do not see HAI as a problem they can prioritize. The knowledge gained by this study could provide insights for the allocation of resources and development of hygiene and wound treatment protocols in resource-limited settings.

"Reality rarely looks like the guidelines": a qualitative study of the challenges hospital-based physicians encounter in war wound management.

BACKGROUND: Globally, armed conflict is a major contributor to mortality and morbidity. The treatment of war-associated injuries is largely experience-based. Evidence is weak due to difficulty in conducting medical research in war settings. A qualitative method could provide insight into the specific challenges associated with providing health care to injured civilians. The aim of this study was to explore the challenges hospital-based physicians encounter in war wound management, focusing on surgical intervention and antibiotic use. METHODS: Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with physicians at a Jordanian hospital supported by Médecins Sans Frontières. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis with an inductive and deductive approach. RESULTS: We found that challenges in war wound management primarily relate to protocol adherence. Protocols for the management of acute war wounds were adhered to on areas that could be considered commonly agreed principles of war wound surgery, such as the use of wound debridement and the evaluation of the systemic condition of the patient before initiating antibiotic treatment. We identified limitations imposed on the physicians that complicate or even hinder protocol adherence. Additionally, we identified factors associated with conscious deviations from the protocols. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that adherence to established protocols around the management of acute war wounds is difficult. We present aspects that may be considered when establishing clinical projects in similar contexts. The knowledge gained by this study could provide insights for the development of protocols or guidelines for wound management and antibiotic use in an unstable setting, such as a hospital in close proximity to armed conflict. We suggest the use of a grounded theory approach to further study the discrepancy between guideline recommendations and actual practice.