RESUMO
Background and objective Blood gas analysis plays a pivotal role in the management of various respiratory and metabolic disorders. Both arterial and venous samples can be used for blood gas analysis. Arterial blood sampling is technically difficult and is associated with more complications as compared to venous sampling. Many studies have shown the correlation of arterial and venous pH and bicarbonate levels in sepsis, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and circulatory failure. But, there is a paucity of data, pertaining specifically to the correlation of arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis and venous blood gas (VBG) analysis in patients with renal failure. The objective of this study was to look for any possible correlation between arterial and venous pH and bicarbonate values in patients with renal failure. Methods This cross-sectional study was carried out at a large tertiary care hospital in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Over a period of eight months, 101 patients with renal failure were enrolled after obtaining informed consent. Arterial and venous samples from the patients were obtained, analyzed, and compared. Results Out of the total 101 patients, 53 (52.5%) were male while 48 (47.5%) were female. The mean age of the patients was 46.23 ±15.54 years. Mean arterial pH and venous pH were 7.35 and 7.28 respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient between arterial and venous pH was found to be 0.857 (p<0.001). The mean arterial and venous bicarbonate values were 14.47 mEq/L and 15.51 mEq/L respectively. And the Pearson correlation coefficient between arterial and venous bicarbonate was found to be 0.842 (p<0.001). Conclusion Venous pH and bicarbonate levels correlate strongly with arterial pH and bicarbonate levels, respectively, in patients with renal failure.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) regarding COVID-19 between public health workers (PHWs) attended field epidemiology training program (FETP-trained) and those who did not attend FETP (non-FETP trained). METHODS: Multi-country cross-sectional survey was conducted among PHWs who participated in COVID-19 pandemic in 10 countries at EMR. Online questionnaire that included demographic information, KAP regarding COVID-19 pandemic was distributed among HCWs. Scoring system was used to quantify the answers, bivariate and Multivariate analysis performed to compare FETP-trained with non-FETP trained PHWs. RESULTS: Overall, 1337 PHWs participated, with 835 (62.4%) < 40 years of age, and 851 (63.6%) males. Of them, 423 (31.6%) had FETP, including that 189 (44.7%) had advanced level, 155 (36.6%) intermediate and 79 (18.7%) basic level training. Compared with non-FETP trained, FETP trained were older, having higher KAP scores. FETP participation was low in infection control, and PH laboratories. KAP mean scores for intermediate level attendees are comparable to advanced level. CONCLUSIONS: FETP-trained are having better KAP than non-FETP PHWs. Expanding the intermediate level, maintain the Rapid Response training and introduce the laboratory component are recommended to maximize the benefit from FETP. Infection control, antimicrobial resistance and coordination are areas where training should include.
