35 research outputs found
Surgical site infection after gastrointestinal surgery in high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries: a prospective, international, multicentre cohort study
Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common infections associated with health care, but its importance as a global health priority is not fully understood. We quantified the burden of SSI after gastrointestinal surgery in countries in all parts of the world.
Methods: This international, prospective, multicentre cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection within 2-week time periods at any health-care facility in any country. Countries with participating centres were stratified into high-income, middle-income, and low-income groups according to the UN's Human Development Index (HDI). Data variables from the GlobalSurg 1 study and other studies that have been found to affect the likelihood of SSI were entered into risk adjustment models. The primary outcome measure was the 30-day SSI incidence (defined by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for superficial and deep incisional SSI). Relationships with explanatory variables were examined using Bayesian multilevel logistic regression models. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02662231.
Findings: Between Jan 4, 2016, and July 31, 2016, 13 265 records were submitted for analysis. 12 539 patients from 343 hospitals in 66 countries were included. 7339 (58·5%) patient were from high-HDI countries (193 hospitals in 30 countries), 3918 (31·2%) patients were from middle-HDI countries (82 hospitals in 18 countries), and 1282 (10·2%) patients were from low-HDI countries (68 hospitals in 18 countries). In total, 1538 (12·3%) patients had SSI within 30 days of surgery. The incidence of SSI varied between countries with high (691 [9·4%] of 7339 patients), middle (549 [14·0%] of 3918 patients), and low (298 [23·2%] of 1282) HDI (p < 0·001). The highest SSI incidence in each HDI group was after dirty surgery (102 [17·8%] of 574 patients in high-HDI countries; 74 [31·4%] of 236 patients in middle-HDI countries; 72 [39·8%] of 181 patients in low-HDI countries). Following risk factor adjustment, patients in low-HDI countries were at greatest risk of SSI (adjusted odds ratio 1·60, 95% credible interval 1·05–2·37; p=0·030). 132 (21·6%) of 610 patients with an SSI and a microbiology culture result had an infection that was resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic used. Resistant infections were detected in 49 (16·6%) of 295 patients in high-HDI countries, in 37 (19·8%) of 187 patients in middle-HDI countries, and in 46 (35·9%) of 128 patients in low-HDI countries (p < 0·001).
Interpretation: Countries with a low HDI carry a disproportionately greater burden of SSI than countries with a middle or high HDI and might have higher rates of antibiotic resistance. In view of WHO recommendations on SSI prevention that highlight the absence of high-quality interventional research, urgent, pragmatic, randomised trials based in LMICs are needed to assess measures aiming to reduce this preventable complication
Healthcare Waste—A Serious Problem for Global Health
Healthcare waste (HCW) is generated in different healthcare facilities (HCFs), such as hospitals, laboratories, veterinary clinics, research centres and nursing homes. It has been assessed that the majority of medical waste does not pose a risk to humans. It is estimated that 15% of the total amount of produced HCW is hazardous and can be infectious, toxic or radioactive. Hazardous waste is a special type of waste which, if not properly treated, can pose a risk to human health and to the environment. HCW contains potentially harmful microorganisms that can be spread among healthcare personnel, hospital patients and the general public, causing serious illnesses. Healthcare personnel are the specialists especially exposed to this risk. The most common medical procedure, which pose the highest risk, is injection (i.e, intramuscular, subcutaneous, intravenous, taking blood samples). The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that around 16 billion injections are administered worldwide each year. However, if safety precautions are not followed, and needles and syringes are not properly disposed of, the risk of sharps injuries increases among medical staff, waste handlers and waste collectors. What is more, sharps injuries increase the risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B and C viruses (HBV/HCV), tuberculosis (TB), diphtheria, malaria, syphilis, brucellosis and other transmissions. Disposing of medical waste in a landfill without segregation and processing will result in the entry of harmful microorganisms, chemicals or pharmaceuticals into soil and groundwater, causing their contamination. Open burning or incinerator malfunctioning will result in the emission of toxic substances, such as dioxins and furans, into the air. In order to reduce the negative impact of medical waste, waste management principles should be formulated. To minimize health risks, it is also important to build awareness among health professionals and the general public through various communication and educational methods. The aim of this paper is to present a general overwiev of medical waste, its categories, the principles of its management and the risks to human health and the environment resulting from inappropriate waste management.</jats:p
Healthcare Waste—A Serious Problem for Global Health
Healthcare waste (HCW) is generated in different healthcare facilities (HCFs), such as hospitals, laboratories, veterinary clinics, research centres and nursing homes. It has been assessed that the majority of medical waste does not pose a risk to humans. It is estimated that 15% of the total amount of produced HCW is hazardous and can be infectious, toxic or radioactive. Hazardous waste is a special type of waste which, if not properly treated, can pose a risk to human health and to the environment. HCW contains potentially harmful microorganisms that can be spread among healthcare personnel, hospital patients and the general public, causing serious illnesses. Healthcare personnel are the specialists especially exposed to this risk. The most common medical procedure, which pose the highest risk, is injection (i.e, intramuscular, subcutaneous, intravenous, taking blood samples). The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that around 16 billion injections are administered worldwide each year. However, if safety precautions are not followed, and needles and syringes are not properly disposed of, the risk of sharps injuries increases among medical staff, waste handlers and waste collectors. What is more, sharps injuries increase the risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B and C viruses (HBV/HCV), tuberculosis (TB), diphtheria, malaria, syphilis, brucellosis and other transmissions. Disposing of medical waste in a landfill without segregation and processing will result in the entry of harmful microorganisms, chemicals or pharmaceuticals into soil and groundwater, causing their contamination. Open burning or incinerator malfunctioning will result in the emission of toxic substances, such as dioxins and furans, into the air. In order to reduce the negative impact of medical waste, waste management principles should be formulated. To minimize health risks, it is also important to build awareness among health professionals and the general public through various communication and educational methods. The aim of this paper is to present a general overwiev of medical waste, its categories, the principles of its management and the risks to human health and the environment resulting from inappropriate waste management
Dedicated mass-casualty incident hospitals : An overview
Introduction Hospitals worldwide are preparing for mass casualty incidents (MCIs). The Major Incident Hospital in the Netherlands was constructed 25 years ago as a dedicated hospital for situations wherein a sudden increase in medical surge capacity is mandated to handle an MCI. Over the years, more initiatives of dedicated MCIs have arisen. Herein, we compared the MCI facilities from three countries considering the reasons for construction and the functionality. Methods Three dedicated mass casualty hospitals and one hospital with a largely fortified structure were compared. The centres were located in the Netherlands, Italy, and Israel. Between August 2015 and January 2016, structured interviews were conducted with representatives of the hospitals’ medical operations. The interviews focussed on general information regarding the need for MCI preparedness and scenarios that require preparation, reasons for construction, hospital missions, and the experiences gained including training. Results All dedicated MCI hospitals had a common policy wherein they sought to create normal work circumstances for the medical staff by using similar equipment and resources as in normal hospitals. The MCI hospitals’ designs differed substantially, as determined by the threats faced by the country. In Europe, these hospitals are designed as a solution to surge capacity and function as buffer hospitals offering readily available, short term, additional medical capacity to the local health care system. Israel faces constant threat from long-term conflicts; during the 2006 war, several hospitals suffered direct missile impacts. Therefore, Israeli MCI hospitals are designed to be fortified structures offering shelter against both conventional and non-conventional warfare and intended as a long-term solution during siege situations. Conclusion Several dedicated MCI hospitals are presently being constructed. During construction, the local circumstances should be taken into account to determine the functionality for both short-term solutions for surge capacity and as fortified structures to withstand under-siege situations
Dedicated mass-casualty incident hospitals: An overview
Introduction Hospitals worldwide are preparing for mass casualty incidents (MCIs). The Major Incident Hospital in the Netherlands was constructed 25 years ago as a dedicated hospital for situations wherein a sudden increase in medical surge capacity is mandated to handle an MCI. Over the years, more initiatives of dedicated MCIs have arisen. Herein, we compared the MCI facilities from three countries considering the reasons for construction and the functionality. Methods Three dedicated mass casualty hospitals and one hospital with a largely fortified structure were compared. The centres were located in the Netherlands, Italy, and Israel. Between August 2015 and January 2016, structured interviews were conducted with representatives of the hospitals’ medical operations. The interviews focussed on general information regarding the need for MCI preparedness and scenarios that require preparation, reasons for construction, hospital missions, and the experiences gained including training. Results All dedicated MCI hospitals had a common policy wherein they sought to create normal work circumstances for the medical staff by using similar equipment and resources as in normal hospitals. The MCI hospitals’ designs differed substantially, as determined by the threats faced by the country. In Europe, these hospitals are designed as a solution to surge capacity and function as buffer hospitals offering readily available, short term, additional medical capacity to the local health care system. Israel faces constant threat from long-term conflicts; during the 2006 war, several hospitals suffered direct missile impacts. Therefore, Israeli MCI hospitals are designed to be fortified structures offering shelter against both conventional and non-conventional warfare and intended as a long-term solution during siege situations. Conclusion Several dedicated MCI hospitals are presently being constructed. During construction, the local circumstances should be taken into account to determine the functionality for both short-term solutions for surge capacity and as fortified structures to withstand under-siege situations
Importance of donor blood chemistry data (AST, serum sodium) in predicting liver transplant outcome
Should retransplantation still be considered for primary non-function after liver transplantation?
Primary non-function (PNF) of a transplanted liver is a postoperative condition characterized by absence of hepatic recovery due to various insults during harvesting, preservation or revascularization. Until recently early retransplantation (RTx) has been considered the policy of choice. Results of RTx for PNF are unsatisfactory (1-year survival rates ranging from 0 to 34%). The management of PNF by medical care without RTx with a recovery rate of 80% and a 1-year actuarial survival rate of 50% is reported for a series of 33 consecutive liver transplants. The guidelines for the medical care management are given and the results are discussed
Deregulation of miRNAs 103a, 30b and 29a in peripheral blood of L-dopa treated Parkinson's patients
Plasma and White Blood Cells Show Different miRNA Expression Profiles in Parkinsonâ\u80\u99s Disease
Parkinsonâ\u80\u99s disease (PD) diagnosis is based on the assessment of motor symptoms, which manifest when more than 50% of dopaminergic neurons are degenerated. To date, no validated biomarkers are available for the diagnosis of PD. The aims of the present study are to evaluate whether plasma and white blood cells (WBCs) are interchangeable biomarker sources and to identify circulating plasma-based microRNA (miRNA) biomarkers for an early detection of PD. We profiled plasma miRNA levels in 99 l-dopa-treated PD patients from two independent data collections, in ten drug-naïve PD patients, and in unaffected controls matched by sex and age. We evaluated expression levels by reverse transcription and quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) and combined the results from treated PD patients using a fixed effect inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis. We revealed different expression profiles comparing plasma and WBCs and drug-naïve and l-dopa-treated PD patients. We observed an upregulation trend for miR-30a-5p in l-dopa-treated PD patients and investigated candidate target genes by integrated in silico analyses. We could not analyse miR-29b-3p, normally expressed in WBCs, due to the very low expression in plasma. We observed different expression profiles in WBCs and plasma, suggesting that they are both suitable but not interchangeable peripheral sources for biomarkers. We revealed miR-30a-5p as a potential biomarker for PD in plasma. In silico analyses suggest that miR-30a-5p might have a regulatory role in mitochondrial dynamics and autophagy. Further investigations are needed to confirm miR-30a-5p deregulation and targets and to investigate the influence of l-dopa treatment on miRNA expression levels
