Biomedical subjects

A Wai

Publications and source records attributed to A Wai.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1997

A double-blind, randomized study of three antimicrobial regimens in the prevention of infections after elective colorectal surgery.

The objective of this study was to assess the prophylactic efficacy of cefoxitin, ceftizoxime, and metronidazole-gentamicin in colorectal surgery. A double-blind, randomized prospective clinical trial design was used in a Canadian tertiary care teaching hospital. Patients were randomized to one of three treatment groups and received three doses of a study drug (30 min preoperative and 2 postoperative doses at 12 and 24 h). Cefoxitin and ceftizoxime were given as 1000-mg doses. Metronidazole-gentamicin was given as 500 mg of metronidazole plus 120 mg of gentamicin in a minibag. High-risk patients (bowel ischemia, diabetic, current steroid use, etc.) received 10 postoperative doses. Patients with infections, prior antibiotics, or study drug allergies were excluded. Over 30 months, 153 patients were enrolled. Thirty-one patients were excluded for protocol violations. Of the 122 evaluable patients (38 ceftizoxime, 45 metronidazole-gentamicin, 39 cefoxitin), there was no difference across groups regarding sex, age, weight, preoperative Apache II score, and prior history of bowel surgery. Groups were equivalent regarding surgeon, nursing unit, high-risk status (six ceftizoxime, seven metronidazole-gentamicin, seven cefoxitin), bowel preparation, and procedure (including blood loss, drains, organ injury, intraoperative complications). Clinically significant infection requiring systemic antibiotics (7-day hospital and 30-day follow-up) was identified in 0% of ceftizoxime, 15% of metronidazole-gentamicin, and 26% of cefoxitin receiving patients (p = 0.005). Mean ASEPSIS scores for each group were 2.3 (range 0-15) for ceftizoxime, 9.2 (range 0-45) for metronidazole-gentamicin, and 10.4 (range 0-75) for cefoxitin (p = 0.01). Ceftizoxime patients tended to have a shorter total hospital stay (12.2 days versus 19.7 days for cefoxitin versus 13.9 days for metronidazole-gentamicin; p = 0.04), although the procedure to discharge interval was not significantly different (p = 0.09). There was no difference in clinical outcome according to risk status. Anaerobic bacteria were observed more commonly in the ceftizoxime and cefoxitin groups, whereas enteric Gram-negative aerobes were observed most often in the metronidazole-gentamicin group. The study regimens were generally well tolerated. Drug costs were equivalent between ceftizoxime and cefoxitin and lowest with the metronidazole-gentamicin regimen. Ceftizoxime appears to be more effective for the prevention of infection in colorectal surgery than either cefoxitin or metronidazole-gentamicin in the dosage regimens studied.

Adult↗

PubMed1996

Double-blind comparison of cefazolin and ceftizoxime for prophylaxis against infections following elective biliary tract surgery.

Antibiotics have been shown to reduce the incidence of wound infections after elective biliary tract procedures. Cefazolin and cefoxitin are among the agents most commonly promoted for this purpose. Cefoxitin has been substituted with ceftizoxime in many institutions; however, the role of ceftizoxime as a prophylactic agent in this setting has not been determined. To assess the comparative prophylactic efficacies of cefazolin and ceftizoxime in biliary tract surgery, we conducted a double-blind, randomized prospective clinical trial in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. Adult patients were randomized to one of two treatment groups and received a 30-min preoperative dose of study drug and as many as two postoperative doses at 12 and 24 h, depending on hospitalization status. Cefazolin and ceftizoxime were given as 1,000-mg doses. Patients with infections, those receiving prior antibiotics, or those with beta-lactam allergies were excluded. Over the 19-month study tenure, 167 patients were enrolled. Seventeen patients were excluded from analysis because of protocol violations. Of the 150 evaluable patients (72 and 78 receiving cefazolin and ceftizoxime doses, respectively), there was no significant difference among groups regarding sex, age, weight, preoperative Apache II score, baseline chemistry, and hematological parameters. Groups were also equivalent regarding the surgeon, type of procedure, characteristics (blood loss, drains, organ injury, and complications), and duration of hospital stay (mean, 5.6 versus 4.3 days [P = 0.31]). No clinical evidence of infection (7-day hospital stay and 30-day follow-up) was identified in 93% of cefazolin and 92% of ceftizoxime patients (P = 1.0). Microbiological confirmation was found in only 18% of primary-site infections. In conclusion, cefazolin and ceftizoxime appear to be equivalent for the prevention of infection in biliary tract surgery with the dosage regimens studied.

Adult↗

PubMed1993

Types of optometric testing emphasized in different practice modes.

BACKGROUND: In order to determine if tests performed in an examination vary with practice settings, we surveyed all 5,200 California licensed optometrists and asked them to identify their primary mode of practice and the percentage of time and/or frequency that certain test procedures were done in an eye examination. METHODS: We restricted our analysis to three practice modes: private, corporate, and nonprofit/health maintenance organization (NP/HMO). We received a 66.4 percent response rate. To determine any trends in emphasis of testing by the three practice modes and to establish relationships between the three, we compared each mode of practice to the other. The combinations were private vs. corporate, corporate vs. NP/HMO, and private vs. NP/HMO. The three combinations were compared to the frequency of performing case history, stereo acuity testing, binocular vision testing, biomicroscopy, dilated fundus examination, tonometry and perimetry. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We found the following relationships in the frequency/emphasis of testing as statistically significant: 1) For stereopsis testing: private practices performed it more often than corporate; 2) For binocular vision testing: private practices performed it more than did either corporate or NP/HMO, corporate performed it more than NP/HMO; 3) For tonometry: corporate performed it slightly more than NP/HMO; 4) For dilation: NP/HMO performed it more than both private and corporate; and 5) For perimetry: private performed it more than both corporate and NP/HMO.

Data Collection↗