Injecting drug use, the skin and vasculature

Damage to the skin, subcutaneous tissues and blood vessels are among the most common health harms related to injecting drug use. From a limited range of early reports of injecting-related skin and soft tissue damage there is now an increasing literature relating to new drugs, new contaminants and problems associated with unsafe injection practices. Clinical issues range from ubiquitous problems associated with repeated minor localised injection trauma to skin and soft tissue and infections around injection sites, to systemic blood infections and chronic vascular disease. The interplay of limited availability and access to sterile injecting equipment, poor injecting technique, compromised drug purity, drug toxicity and difficult personal and environmental conditions give rise to injection-related health harms. This review of injecting-related skin, soft tissue and vascular damage focuses on epidemiology and causation, clinical examination and investigation, treatment and prevention

'Care and Prevent': rationale for investigating skin and soft tissue infections and AA amyloidosis among people who inject drugs in London.

BACKGROUND: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among people who inject drugs (PWID). International data indicate up to one third of PWID have experienced an SSTI within the past month. Complications include sepsis, endocarditis and amyloid A (AA) amyloidosis. AA amyloidosis is a serious sequela of chronic SSTI among PWID. Though there is a paucity of literature reporting on AA amyloidosis among PWID, what has been published suggests there is likely a causal relationship between AA amyloidosis and injecting-related SSTI. If left untreated, AA amyloidosis can lead to renal failure; premature mortality among diagnosed PWID is high. Early intervention may reverse disease. Despite the high societal and individual burden of SSTI among PWID, empirical evidence on the barriers and facilitators to injecting-related SSTI prevention and care or the feasibility and acceptability of AA amyloidosis screening and treatment referral are limited. This study aims to fill these gaps and assess the prevalence of AA amyloidosis among PWID. METHODS: Care and Prevent is a UK National Institute for Health Research-funded mixed-methods study. In five phases (P1-P5), we aim to assess the evidence for AA amyloidosis among PWID (P1); assess the feasibility of AA amyloidosis screening, diagnostic and treatment referral among PWID in London (P2); investigate the barriers and facilitators to AA amyloidosis care (P3); explore SSTI protection and risk (P4); and co-create harm reduction resources with the affected community (P5). This paper describes the conceptual framework, methodological design and proposed analysis for the mixed-methods multi-phase study. RESULTS: We are implementing the Care and Prevent protocol in London. The systematic review component of the study has been completed and published. Care and Prevent will generate an estimate of AA amyloidosis prevalence among community recruited PWID in London, with implications for the development of screening recommendations and intervention implementation. We aim to recruit 400 PWID from drug treatment services in London, UK. CONCLUSIONS: Care and Prevent is the first study to assess screening feasibility and the prevalence of positive proteinuria, as a marker for AA amyloidosis, among PWID accessing drug treatment services. AA amyloidosis is a serious, yet under-recognised condition for which early intervention is available but not employed

Global patient outcomes after elective surgery: prospective cohort study in 27 low-, middle- and high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: As global initiatives increase patient access to surgical treatments, there remains a need to understand the adverse effects of surgery and define appropriate levels of perioperative care. METHODS: We designed a prospective international 7-day cohort study of outcomes following elective adult inpatient surgery in 27 countries. The primary outcome was in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes were death following a complication (failure to rescue) and death in hospital. Process measures were admission to critical care immediately after surgery or to treat a complication and duration of hospital stay. A single definition of critical care was used for all countries. RESULTS: A total of 474 hospitals in 19 high-, 7 middle- and 1 low-income country were included in the primary analysis. Data included 44 814 patients with a median hospital stay of 4 (range 2-7) days. A total of 7508 patients (16.8%) developed one or more postoperative complication and 207 died (0.5%). The overall mortality among patients who developed complications was 2.8%. Mortality following complications ranged from 2.4% for pulmonary embolism to 43.9% for cardiac arrest. A total of 4360 (9.7%) patients were admitted to a critical care unit as routine immediately after surgery, of whom 2198 (50.4%) developed a complication, with 105 (2.4%) deaths. A total of 1233 patients (16.4%) were admitted to a critical care unit to treat complications, with 119 (9.7%) deaths. Despite lower baseline risk, outcomes were similar in low- and middle-income compared with high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Poor patient outcomes are common after inpatient surgery. Global initiatives to increase access to surgical treatments should also address the need for safe perioperative care. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN5181700

Quality assurance/control issues. International Academy of Cytology Task Force summary. Diagnostic Cytology Towards the 21st Century: An International Expert Conference and Tutorial.

ISSUES: General definitions of quality assurance and quality control (QA/C) have existed in many forms for decades, and a new discipline guides their application to diverse industrial and recently medical processes without much fanfare. However, in the field of cervical cytology screening, the range of QA/C options has recently broadened and become controversial. With the advent of new systems of terminology, larger-scale laboratories and new technologies--plus strong governmental and legal pressures in some nations--the range of extremely difficult and sometimes expensive QA/C choices our community faces is greater than ever. CONSENSUS POSITION: At our conference, the basic definitions of QA/C posed little difficulty. Presentation of the range of methods in use today and of those based on new technologies where use is proposed or has just begun also was achieved with little or no dispute. However, there was lack of consensus on exactly how QA/C methods are to be assessed. Indeed, there was little consistency in the use of different outcome measures with which we can judge success or failure of specific QA/C options. In addition, the tension between pressure to adopt sometimes uncertain or expensive method enhancements and pressure to maintain affordability and the widest possible access for populations that most need cervical cytology screening is greater than ever. ONGOING ISSUES: More data are required that would enable assessment of QA/C options with the clearest possible understanding of cost/benefits and current or new assumptions of risk. Other task forces, such as medicolegal, cost/benefit and those devoted to new technologies, are our essential partners in meeting the challenges described above