RESUMO
Background Surgical site infections (SSIs), the third most common nosocomial infection, endanger hospitals and patients. SSIs must be monitored continuously. This present study examined SSI incidence, risk factors, pathogens, and antibiotic sensitivity in emergency and elective or planned abdominal surgeries. Methods The Dr. S.N. Medical College General Surgery Department in Jodhpur, India, operated on 100 patients. The sample was divided into two 50-person groups. Group A includes emergency surgery patients, while Group B includes elective surgery patients. The samples were aseptically collected and processed according to microbiological methods. Data were processed with IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 20 (released 2011; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States). Results Out of a sample size of 100 patients, 17 individuals experienced SSIs. SSI incidence was 16.66% in male patients and 18.18% in female patients. In addition, the rate of SSIs was 26% in the emergency group and 8% in the planned group. The association was stronger among elderly individuals, diabetics (33.33% in Group A and 12.5% in Group B), and anemics with a history of smoking. The association was higher in those who underwent surgery for more than 60 minutes (34.37% in Group A and 18.8% in Group B). The incidence of SSIs was higher in emergency cases compared to elective surgeries, with rates of 26% and 8%, respectively, but was statistically insignificant. The infection rate in clean cases during planned surgery was 3.70%, while clean contaminated cases during planned surgery had a wound infection rate of approximately 13.04%. In emergency surgery, no clean case was operated on, but the SSI rate in the emergency group was 9.09%, 22.22%, and 47.36% in the clean-contaminated, contaminated, and dirty cases, respectively. In Group A, Escherichia coli was the predominant organism found in SSI wounds, while in Group B, Staphylococcus aureus was the predominant organism, accounting for 46.15% and 50% of infections, respectively. Amikacin and metronidazole exhibited the highest efficacy against E. coli, with amikacin demonstrating the highest sensitivity. Conclusion SSIs are more common in emergencies than planned procedures. Age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, smoking, and prolonged surgery are risk factors for SSIs. Effective antibiotic policy and infection control can greatly prevent SSIs.
RESUMO
Nearly 65%-95% of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients have hypertension. Calcium-channel blockers are the first-line drugs for the treatment of hypertension, including hypertension with diabetes. This study aims to estimate the effect of an L-type calcium channel blocker (CCB), cilnidipine, on the renal function of hypertensive patients. Randomized control trials were selected from PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Science Direct, Elton B. Stephens Company (EBSCO), Springer, Ovid, Cochrane Library, Medline, VIP, and Wanfang databases (from the date of databases' establishment till January 2022). Data were independently evaluated following the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The changes in serum creatinine (SCr), urinary protein excretion (UPE), urinary protein/creatinine ratio (UPCR), and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) before and after treatment, in percentages, were extracted for the meta-analysis. The mean difference (MD) and a CI of 95% were determined using RevMan 5.3 software. A total of 11 studies were analyzed. The standardized mean difference (SMD) between cilnidipine and L-type CCBs was -0.022, suggesting a reduced SCr with cilnidipine. For UPCR, the SMD value is 1.28. Although cilnidipine reduced UPCR in all four studies, the L-type CCBs reported a slight increase in UPCR. For eGFR, the SMD value was found to be 0.693. Cilnidipine had a more favorable effect on eGFR when compared to the L-type CCBs. While cilnidipine had similar effects on SCr to that of L-type CCBs, cilnidipine showed greater improvement in UPCR, UPE, and eGFR values.
RESUMO
Background and Aims: Resilience of healthcare professionals involved in Anesthesia practice is relatively a new area of research. Improvement of resilience is important for the sustainability of the healthcare workforce. The aim of this study was to evaluate resilience of the health care providers towards intra-operative emergency situation and intensive care unit. Material and Methods: In this cross-sectional pilot study, healthcare providers working involved in anesthesia practice responded to a questionnaire consisting of 20 questions related to their regular work profile. Answers were graded as- "Yes", "Not often" and "No". Scores of "Three", "Two" and "One" were assigned to these responses and total score was calculated. Frequency and percentage of each response were compared based on place of work and roles. Scores were compared based on the designation. Results: Out of 103 healthcare workers 56 (54.4%) were from government or charity hospital. Thirty-one (30.1%) were Junior Residents. Comparison of responses based on the role/designation, significant differences were observed for questions- I reach to operation theatre well before the proposed time for the case (0.02994), I personally check operation theatre preparation (p = 0.01966), I check for the consent form every time (p = 0.02018), I can recognize different electrocardiogram (ECG) patterns (p = 0.00231) and I always try to learn from everything (p = 0.01989). Based on the place of work of study participants, there was a significant difference (p = 0.002095) for question, i.e., "I personally check operation theatre preparation." Conclusion: The study results suggested good resilience of healthcare professionals involved in anesthesia and intensive care. Some pointers towards burnout are seen among study population. Early interventions may be useful to improve resilience and reduce risk of burnout.
