Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Infect Chemother ; 51(3): 263-273, 2019 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31583860

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Procalcitonin (PCT) is a diagnostic biomarker for bacterial infections in critically-ill patients. However, the cut-off value of PCT for the diagnosis of bacterial infections is unclear and unreliable. This study aimed to determine the optimal cut-off value of PCT for the diagnosis of bacterial infections in critically-ill patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study involving 311 adult patients who had been admitted to the medical or surgical intensive care unit for more than 24 hours from 2013 to 2015. At least one blood test for PCT level was performed for all patients within the first 24 hours of suspecting an infection. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-seven patients had bacterial infections, while 154 did not. Patients with bacterial infections had a significantly higher median PCT level than those without bacterial infections (1.90 ng/mL vs. 0.16 ng/mL, P <0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of PCT for discriminating between bacterial and non-bacterial infections was 0.874 (95% confidence interval: 0.834, 0.914; P <0.001). The optimal cut-off value of PCT for differentiating between fevers due to bacterial infections from those due to non-bacterial infections was 0.5 ng/mL, with a sensitivity of 84.7%, specificity of 79.9%, positive predictive value of 81.1%, and negative predictive value of 83.7%. CONCLUSION: PCT was found to be an accurate biomarker for the diagnosis of bacterial infections among patients admitted to medical and surgical intensive care units. The optimal cut-off value of PCT for the diagnosis of bacterial infections was 0.5 ng/mL.

2.
Am J Infect Control ; 39(6): 525-8, 2011 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21612842

RESUMO

We aimed to report the coverage and safety of the influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccination (Panenza; Sanofi Pasteur, Val de Reuil Cedex, France) among health care personnel (HCP) in a university hospital setting in Thailand. The hospital set up a system to vaccinate HCP and did surveillance of the adverse effects (AEs). During a 4-week period, 6,210 (78.7%) HCP were vaccinated. There were 82 reported nonserious AEs among 32 HCP. The most common AE was fatigue/uncomfortable feeling (24%).


Assuntos
Pessoal de Saúde , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1/imunologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra Influenza/efeitos adversos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Fadiga/induzido quimicamente , Fadiga/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Influenza Humana/virologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tailândia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA