Metoclopramide, versus its combination with dexamethasone in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are significant problems in laparoscopic surgery. OBJECTIVE: Compare the prophylactic use of metoclopramide and its combination with dexamethasone in the prevention of PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). MATERIAL AND METHOD: One hundred patients aged 18 to 75 with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 1-2 who candidates for elective LC at Chiang Mai University Hospital, were included in this double-blind, randomized controlled trial (parallel design). Patients were randomly divided into two groups, by 'Block offour 'randomization. Treatment group received 8 mg dexamethasone and 10 mg metoclopramide, and control group received 10 mg metoclopramide and normal saline solution 1.6 ml. These medications were administered intravenously when the gallbladder was removedfrom gallbladder bed. All of investigators, anesthetists, patients, care providers, and outcome assessor were blinded. Patients were asked to assess their nausea and vomiting at 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively, and at discharge. The overall score of PONV in each patient based on afour-point whole number of nausea and vomiting by verbal rating scale 0-3 (0 = no nausea and vomiting, 1 = nausea, 2 = nausea with vomiting, and 3 = repeated vomiting >2 times). RESULTS: Fifty eligible patients were randomized to each group, and all were analyzed. There were no significant differences between baseline characteristics of patients in the two groups. The combination of dexamethasone and metoclopramide indicated a greater antiemetic effect with significant statistical analysis, odds ratio = 0.25 (95% confidence interval O. 11-0.55, p = 0.001). Thepostoperative hospital stay in the combined group and metoclopramide group were, 1 day = 47 (94%) and 37 (74%), >1 day = 3 (6%) and 13 (26%), respectively (p = 0.012). There were no postoperative complications occurred in both groups. CONCLUSION: Intravenous administration of dexamethasone combined with metoclopramide had significant effects in prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting after LC and shorten the hospital stay. Clinical trials registration number: TCTR20140128001

Microbiology, risk factors and mortality of patients with intravenous catheter related blood stream infections in the surgical intensive care unit: a five-year, concurrent, case-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The epidemiologic data of catheter related blood stream infections (CRBSI) is different in each type of Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The objectives were to identify microbiological patterns, risk factors and mortality analysis in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU). MATERIAL AND METHOD: All CRBSI cases were reviewed in a 60-months period from the 1st ofJanuary, 2005 through the 31st of December, 2009. Two or three control patients, who had been catheterized within three days and were free of CRBSI, were randomly selected from the ICU admissions registration book as the control group; demographic data, mortality, organisms found and antibiotic sensitivity were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: In the 5-years period, 44 patients were diagnosed with a CRBSI and 129 patients who were without a CRBSI were selected. The total infection rate was 1.31 per 1,000 catheter-days. Nine patients who contracted a CRBSI (20.4%) expired. A primary diagnosis of gastrointestinal problems had shown the greatest risk for developing a CRBSI (69.7%). In proportions of gram negative bacteria:gram positive bacteria:fungus, this was measured at 43:36:21 respectively. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common gram positive bacteria found. Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterobacter cloacae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were the three most common gram negative bacteria found. The chance of developing a CRBSI was significantly increased after 10 days of catheterization. The mortality probability of gram negative bacterial infections and fungal infections increased over time. This was in contrast to gram positive bacterial infections, which decreased over time despite having shown the highest possibility of death earlier in catheter days. As for multivariable analyses, catheterization of patients in the general wards was the sole independent risk factor of CRBSI occurrences (OR = 8.67, p < 0.01) and the males (OR = 7.20, p = 0.03) have shown the highest risk factors for mortality. CONCLUSION: The occurrence of gram-negative bacteria and gram-positive bacteria related CRBSI was similar but the probability patterns of increasing the catheter days relating to CRBSI occurrence and mortality rates were different. Catheterization in the general wards was the only independent risk factor found for contracting a CRBSI in our institute. Males had the highest risk for mortality.

Association between clinical factors and mortality in older adult trauma patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study reviews and meta-analysis factors affecting mortality in older adult trauma patients, addressing previously unidentified heterogeneity and risk burden. METHODS: Databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus) were searched for studies from January 1, 2000, to April 30, 2024. Inclusion criteria were patients aged ≥65 years with trauma, assessing survival or death outcomes. Two authors independently screened and extracted data using the PRISMA checklist; disagreements were resolved by a third author. RESULTS: Eighteen retrospective studies were included (425,355 patients), showing an overall mortality rate of 9.6 â€‹%. Falls were the predominant cause of injury. Demographic mortality risk factors included advanced age, frailty, male sex, and comorbidities (blood/bleeding disorders, liver disease, cancer, kidney disease, and lung disease). Injury risk factors were identified as contributing to the outcome, including low systolic blood pressure, Glasgow Coma Scale, Injury Severity Score, Revised Trauma Score, and surgical intervention. CONCLUSION: Trauma significantly elevates the mortality rate in older adults, with advanced age, gender, comorbidities, injury severity, frailty, and surgical intervention being key factors.

Effects of rapid response trauma team in thoracic injuries in northern trauma center level I.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Associated thoracic injury is the first priority at the initial assessment and its outcomes are time-dependent. Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University organized a rapid response trauma team (RRTT) at mid-year 2006. The aims of this present paper were to report the effects of RRTT regarding outcomes of thoracic injury. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We performed a retrospective review for admitted thoracic injury patients between January 2004 and September 2009. The interval prior to July 2006 was defined as "before RRTT" and the latter as "after RRTT". The severity-adjusted mortality was calculated. RESULTS: During the 69 months, 951 patients were included (427 in "before RRTT", 524 in "after RRTT"). Although the severity injury score (ISS) was significantly lower before RRTT the severe trauma patients (ISS > 15) had a significantly higher mortality (25.3% vs. 15.3%; p = 0.01). RRTTsignificantly improved the mortality odds ratio in the overall and severe trauma [0.39 (0.22-0.68); p < 0.01 and 0.43 (0.25-0.73); p < 0.01]. Subgroup analysis found to have positive effects with the RRTT in maxillofacial, head, and orthopedics associated injuries. CONCLUSION: RRTT for thoracic injuries in the tertiary level I trauma center could decrease the severity-adjusted mortality, especially in severe trauma patients.

Effectiveness of heterologous third and fourth dose COVID-19 vaccine schedules for SARS-CoV-2 infection during delta and omicron predominance in Thailand: a test-negative, case-control study.

Background: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has evolved quickly, with numerous waves of different variants of concern resulting in the need for countries to offer continued protection through booster vaccination. To ensure adequate vaccination coverage, Thailand has proactively adopted heterologous vaccination schedules. While randomised controlled trials have assessed homologous schedules in detail, limited data has been reported for heterologous vaccine effectiveness (VE). Methods: Utilising a unique active surveillance network established in Chiang Mai, Northern Thailand, we conducted a test-negative case control study to assess the VE of heterologous third and fourth dose schedules against SARS-CoV-2 infection among suspect-cases during Oct 1-Dec 31, 2021 (delta-predominant) and Feb 1-Apr 10, 2022 (omicron-predominant) periods. Findings: After a third dose, effectiveness against delta infection was high (adjusted VE 97%, 95% CI 94-99%) in comparison to moderate protection against omicron (adjusted VE 31%, 95% CI 26-36%). Good protection was observed after a fourth dose (adjusted VE 75%, 95% CI 71-80%). VE was consistent across age groups for both delta and omicron infection. The VE of third or fourth doses against omicron infection were equivalent for the three main vaccines used for boosting in Thailand, suggesting coverage, rather than vaccine type is a much stronger predictor of protection. Interpretation: Appropriately timed booster doses have a high probability of preventing COVID-19 infection with both delta and omicron variants. Our evidence supports the need for ongoing national efforts to increase population coverage of booster doses. Funding: This research was supported by the National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT) under The Smart Emergency Care Services Integration (SECSI) project to Faculty of Public Health Chiang Mai University.

Role of booster vaccines and hybrid immunity against severe COVID-19 outcomes during BA.5 omicron predominance in Thailand.

Owing to both vaccine- and infection-induced immunity, the COVID-19 seroprevalence is ~90% in most countries. It is important to examine the protective role of booster vaccines and hybrid immunity in the COVID-endemic state. Utilizing a hospital information system for COVID-19, we conducted a cohort study by linking laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 case data to the national immunization records during the BA.5 omicron predominant period (1 August-31 December 2022) in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Out of 63,009 adults with COVID-19 included in the study, there were 125 (0.2%) severe COVID outcomes and 6.4% had a previous omicron infection. Protection against severe COVID-19 was highest among those with at least one booster vaccine (63%; aHR 0.37 [95%CI 0.19-0.73]) as compared to those without prior vaccination or natural infection. Hybrid immunity offered better protection (35%; aHR 0.65 [95%CI 0.09-4.73) than primary vaccine series alone or previous infection alone. Evaluating risk by age group, those aged 70 years or more had nearly 40 times (aHR 39.58 [95%CI 18.92-82.79]) the risk of severe-COVID-19 as compared to the 18-39-year age group. While booster vaccines remain the most effective way of protecting against severe COVID-19, particularly in the elderly, hybrid immunity may offer additional benefit.

Heterologous booster vaccines reduce severity and mortality in COVID-19 during BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5 omicron predominance in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has evolved quickly, with variants of concern resulting in the need to offer booster vaccinations. Unfortunately, the booster uptake has been slow and vaccine response has shown to wane over time. Therefore, it's critical to evaluate the role of vaccinations on outcomes with newer sub-lineages of omicron. METHODS: Utilising a Hospital Information System established in Chiang Mai, Thailand, we conducted a cohort study by linking patient-level data of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases to the national immunization records, during BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5 predominance. RESULTS: In adjusted cox-proportional hazard models, BA.4/BA.5 was not associated with more severe COVID-19 outcomes or deaths as compared to BA.2. Risk of severe outcomes and deaths were significantly reduced with third (87% and 95%) and fourth (88% and 95%) dose vaccination, while events were not observed with a fifth dose. Across the regimens, vaccination within 14-90 days prior showed the highest level of protection. All the vaccine types used for boosting in Thailand offered similar protection against severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Boosters provide high level of protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths with newer omicron sub-lineages. Booster campaigns should focus on improving coverage utilising all available vaccines to ensure optimal protection.

Reduction in severity and mortality in COVID-19 patients owing to heterologous third and fourth-dose vaccines during the periods of delta and omicron predominance in Thailand.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has evolved quickly, with different variants of concern resulting in the need for countries to offer booster vaccinations. Although studies have assessed homologous schedules in detail, the effectiveness of heterologous booster vaccine schedules against severity and mortality with newer variants remains to be explored fully. METHODS: Utilizing a Hospital Information System for COVID-19 established in Chiang Mai, Thailand, we conducted a cohort study by linking patient-level data on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases to the national immunization records, during delta-predominant and omicron-predominant periods. RESULTS: Compared to omicron, COVID-19 cases during the delta period were 10 times more likely to have severe outcomes and in-hospital deaths. During omicron, a third vaccine dose had an 89% reduced risk of both severe COVID-19 and death. The third dose received 14-90 days before the date of the positive test showed the highest protection (93%). Severe outcomes were not observed with the third dose during delta, and the fourth dose during the omicron period. All the vaccine types used for boosting in Thailand offered similar protection against severe COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Booster doses provided a very high level of protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths. Booster campaigns should focus on improving coverage by utilizing all available vaccines to ensure optimal protection.

Waning vaccine response to severe COVID-19 outcomes during omicron predominance in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has evolved quickly, with different variants of concern resulting in the need to offer continued protection through booster vaccinations. The duration of enhanced protection with booster doses against severe COVID-19 is still unclear. Understanding this is critical to recommendations on the frequency of future booster doses. METHODS: Utilising a Hospital Information System for COVID-19 established in Chiang Mai, Thailand, we conducted a cohort study by linking patient-level data of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases to the national immunization records, during the omicron predominant period (1 February- 31 July 2022). RESULTS: Out of 261,103 adults with COVID-19 included in the study, there were 333 (0.13%) severe COVID-19 cases and 190 (0.07%) deaths. Protection against severe COVID-19 was highest with boosters received >14-60 days prior to positive test (93%) and persisted at >60-120 days (91%) but started to wane at >120-180 days (77%) and further at >180 days (68%). The rate of waning differed with age. Those ≥70 years showed faster waning of booster vaccine responses as compared to those aged 18-49 years, who retained good responses up to 180 days. Equivalent risk reduction against severe COVID-19 was seen with all the vaccine types used as boosters in Thailand. CONCLUSIONS: Booster doses provided high levels of protection against severe COVID-19 with omicron, up to 4 months. Repeat boosters will be required to continue protection beyond 4 months, particularly in the elderly. mRNA and viral vector vaccines can be used flexibly to improve booster coverage.

Scalpel versus electrosurgery for abdominal incisions.

BACKGROUND: Scalpels or electrosurgery can be used to make abdominal incisions. The potential benefits of electrosurgery include reduced blood loss, dry and rapid separation of tissue, and reduced risk of cutting injury to surgeons, though there are concerns about poor wound healing, excessive scarring, and adhesion formation. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects on wound complications of scalpel and electrosurgery for making abdominal incisions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 24 February 2012); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 2); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to February Week 3 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations 23 February 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2012 Week 07); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 17 February 2012). We did not apply date or language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects on wound complications of electrosurgery with scalpel use for the creation of abdominal incisions. The study participants were patients undergoing major open abdominal surgery, regardless of the orientation of the incision (vertical, oblique, or transverse) and surgical setting (elective or emergency). Electrosurgical incisions included those in which the major layers of abdominal wall, including subcutaneous tissue and musculoaponeurosis (a strong sheet of fibrous connective tissue that serves as a tendon to attach muscles), were made by electrosurgery, regardless of the techniques used to incise the abdominal skin and peritoneum. Scalpel incisions included those in which all major layers of abdominal wall including skin, subcutaneous tissue, and musculoaponeurosis, were incised by a scalpel, regardless of the techniques used on the abdominal peritoneum. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias. One review author extracted data which were checked by a second review author. We calculated risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data, and difference in means (MD) and 95% CI for continuous data. We examined heterogeneity between studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine RCTs (1901 participants) which were mainly at unclear risk of bias due to poor reporting. There was no statistically significant difference in overall wound complication rates (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.18), nor in rates of wound dehiscence (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.98), however both these comparisons are underpowered and a treatment effect cannot be excluded. There is insufficient reliable evidence regarding the effects of electrosurgery compared with scalpel incisions on blood loss, pain, and incision time. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that making an abdominal incision with electrosurgery may be as safe as using a scalpel. However, these conclusions are based on relatively few events and more research is needed. The relative effects of scalpels and electrosurgery are unclear for the outcomes of blood loss, pain, and incision time.

Satisfaction and Barriers of Surgical Safety Checklist Implementation in a Nonmandatory Adoption Resource-Limited Country.

OBJECTIVES: A surgical safety checklist has been a globally implemented and mandated adoption in several countries. However, its use is not mandatory in Thailand. This study aimed to evaluate the perceptions of surgical personnel on surgical complications and safety and to examine the satisfaction and barriers of surgical safety checklist implementation. METHODS: A survey study was performed between November 2013 and February 2015 in 61 Thai hospitals. A questionnaire capturing demographics, perceptions related to surgical complications and safety, and the satisfaction and barriers of surgical safety checklist implementation was distributed to surgical personnel. RESULTS: A total of 2024 surgical personnel were recruited. Nearly all of them reported experience or knowledge of an adverse surgical event (99.6%). Most thought that it could be preventable (98.2%) and quality care improvement could help reduce the occurrence of adverse events (97.7%). Overall, respondents reported a high level of satisfaction with the checklist (mean [SD] = 3.79 [0.71]). The three areas of highest satisfaction were benefit to the patient (mean [SD] = 4.11 [0.69]), benefit to the organization (mean [SD] = 4.05 [0.68]), and reduction in adverse events (mean [SD] = 4.02 [0.69]). Overall, the barrier for implementation of the checklist was rated as moderate (mean [SD] = 2.52 [0.99]). However, the means of barriers in each period, sign in, time out, and sign out, were rated as low (means [SD] = 2.41 [1.07], 2.50 [1.03], and 2.34 [1.01], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The data document that the satisfaction with the checklist are fairly high. However, some barriers were identified. Efforts to increase understanding through more rigorous policy enforcement and strategic support may lead to improving the checklist implementation.

An exploration of surgical team perceptions toward implementation of surgical safety checklists in a non-native English-speaking country.

BACKGROUND: In-depth information on the success and failure of implementing the World Health Organization surgical safety checklist (SSC) has been questioned in non-native English-speaking countries. This study explored the experiences of SSC implementation and documented barriers and strategies to improve SSC implementation. METHODS: A qualitative study was performed in 33 Thai hospitals. The information from focus group discussions with 39 nurses and face-to-face, in-depth interviews with 50 surgical personnel was analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: Major barriers were an unclear policy, inadequate personnel, refusals and resistance from the surgical team, English/electronic SSC, and foreign patients. The key strategies to improve SSC implementation were found to be policy management, training using role-play and station-based deconstruction, adapting SSC implementation suitable for the hospital's context, building self-awareness, and patient involvement. CONCLUSION: The barriers of SSC were related to infrastructure and patients. Effective policy management, teamwork and individual improvement, and patient involvement may be the keys to successful SSC implementation.

Predictive Factors for a Long Hospital Stay in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

Background. Although the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) over open cholecystectomy are immediately obvious and appreciated, several patients need a postoperative hospital stay of more than 24 hours. Thus, the predictive factors for this longer stay need to be investigated. The aim of this study was to identify the causes of a long hospital stay after LC. Methods. This is a retrospective cohort study with 500 successful elective LC patients being included in the analysis. Short hospital stay was defined as being discharged within 24 hours after the operation, whereas long hospital stay was defined as the need for a stay of more than 24 hours after the operation. Results. Using multivariable analysis, ten independent predictive factors were identified for a long hospital stay. These included patients with cirrhosis, patients with a history of previous acute cholecystitis, cholangitis, or pancreatitis, patients on anticoagulation with warfarin, patients with standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum, patients who had been given metoclopramide as an intraoperative antiemetic drug, patients who had been using abdominal drain, patients who had numeric rating scale for pain > 3, patients with an oral analgesia requirement > 2 doses, complications, and private ward admission. Conclusions. LC difficulties were important predictive factors for a long hospital stay, as well as medication and operative factors.

Left retroperitoneal versus midline transperitoneal approach for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) repair.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this prospective randomized study was to compare the left retroperitoneal approach (RPA) with the midline transperitoneal approach (TPA) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) repair with operative details, postoperative complications, and total cost comparision. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Between January 2000 and December 2003, 36 patients undergoing elective surgery for infrarenal AAAs were included in the prospective comparison of transperitoneal approach (TPA) with retroperitoneal approach (RPA). Thirty-six patients were analyzed, with 18 in group 2 (TPA) and 18 in group I (PRA). There was no significant differences between the groups in patient demographics. (p value > 0.05) RESULTS: There was no significant differences in the aortic cross clamp time, operative time, estimated blood loss and intraoperative blood transfusion between the two groups (p value > 0.05); however, significantly more intraoperative fluid needs and bowel function onset had a statistically longer return in group 11 (TPA) than in group I (RPA). Statistically reduction in postoperative ileus (>4 days) and total length of hospital stay was observed in group I (RPA) (p value < 0.05). Postoperative cardiopulmonary complications were statistically significantly more increased in group II (TPA) than in group I (RPA). Wound complications were more in group I (RPA) (1 hematoma, 4 abdominal wall hernia, and 4 chronic wound pain) than in group II (TPA) (2 chronic wound pain). Total cost payment was not significantly different in both groups. CONCLUSION: The left retroperitoneal approach for infrarenal AAAs repair, with fewer cardiopulmonary complications and shorter hospital stay has more unsatisfactory postoperative wound complications than the midline transperitoneal approach.

Fluid accumulation threshold measured by acute body weight change after admission in general surgical intensive care units: how much should be concerning?

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01351506) was to identify the threshold level of fluid accumulation measured by acute body weight (BW) change during the first week in a general surgical intensive care unit (ICU), which is associated with ICU mortality and other adverse outcomes. METHODS: Four hundred sixty-five patients were prospectively followed for a 28-day period. The maximum BW change threshold during the first week was evaluated by the maximum percentage change in BW from the ICU admission weight (Max%ΔBW). Daily screening of adverse events in the ICU were recorded. The cutoff point of Max%ΔBW on ICU mortality was defined by considering the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, intersection of the sensitivity and specificity, and the Youden Index. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to demonstrate the associations. Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05. RESULTS: The appropriate cutoff value of Max%ΔBW threshold was 5%. Regarding the multivariable regression model, in overall patients, the occurrence of the following adverse events (expressed as adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]) were significantly associated with a Max%ΔBW of >5%: ICU mortality (2.38 [1.25-4.54]) (P=0.008), ICU mortality in patients without renal replacement therapy (RRT) (2.47 [1.21-5.06]) (P=0.013), reintubation within 72 hours (2.51 [1.04-6.00]) (P=0.039), RRT requirement (2.67 [1.13-6.33]) (P=0.026), and delirium (1.97 [1.08-3.57]) (P=0.025). Regarding the postoperative subgroup, a Max%ΔBW value of more than 5% was significantly associated with: ICU mortality (3.87 [1.38-10.85]) (P=0.010), ICU mortality in patients without RRT (6.32 [1.85-21.64]) (P=0.003), reintubation within 72 hours (4.44 [1.30-15.16]) (P=0.017), and vasopressor requirement (2.04 [1.04-4.01]) (P=0.037). CONCLUSION: Fluid accumulation, measured as acute BW change of more than the threshold of 5% during the first week of ICU admission, is associated with adverse outcomes of higher ICU mortality, especially in the patients without RRT, with reintubation within 72 hours, with RRT requirement, with vasopressor requirement, and with delirium. Some of these effects were higher in postoperative patients. This threshold value might be an indicator for caution during fluid management in surgical ICU.

Microbiology, resistance patterns, and risk factors of mortality in ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia in a Northern Thai tertiary-care university based general surgical intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) occurrence, causative pathogens, and resistance patterns in surgical intensive care units (SICU) are different between Western and developing Asian countries. In Thailand, resistant organisms have progressively increased in the last decade. However, the evidence describing causes of VAP and its outcomes, especially secondary to resistant pathogens, in Asian developing countries' SICUs is very limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to describe the incidence, pathogen characteristics, and risk factors that impact mortality and patient survival following VAP in a tertiary Northern Thai SICU. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2012, VAP occurred in a total of 150 patients in Chiang Mai University's general SICUs (6.3±2.8 cases per 1,000 mechanical ventilator days). The following clinical data were collected from 46 patients who died and 104 patients who survived: microbiologic results, susceptible patterns, and survival status at hospital discharge. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns were classified as susceptible, multidrug resistant (MDR), extensively drug resistant (XDR), and pan-drug resistant (PDR). The hazard ratio (HR) was calculated for risk factor analysis. RESULTS: Regarding the microbiology, gram negative organisms were the major pathogens (n=142, 94.7%). The first three most common organisms were Acinetobacter baumannii (38.7% of all organisms, mortality 41.4%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (17.3%, mortality 30.8%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (16.7%, mortality 16%) respectively. The most common gram positive organism was Staphylococcus aureus (4.0%, mortality 50%). The median day of VAP occurrence were significantly different between the three groups (P<0.01): susceptible (day 4), MDR (day 5), and XDR (day 6.5). Only half of all VAP cases were caused by susceptible organisms. Antibiotic resistance was demonstrated by 49.3% of the gram negative organisms and 62.5% of the gram positive organisms. Extensive drug resistance was evident only in Acinetobacter baumannii (30.6%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (1.3%). No pan-drug resistance was found during surveillance. The significant HR risk factors were age (P=0.03), resistant organisms (P=0.04), XDR (P=0.02), and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score (<0.01). Acinetobacter baumannii (P=0.06) and intubation due to severe sepsis (P=0.08) demonstrated a trend toward a significant increase in the HR. On the other hand, there were significantly decreased HRs in trauma patients (P=0.01). Initial administration of appropriate antibiotic therapy had a tendency toward a significant decrease in the HR (P=0.08). CONCLUSION: Gram negative organisms were the primary cause of bacterial VAP in Chiang Mai University's general SICU. Resistant strains were present in half of all VAP cases and were associated with the day of VAP onset. Regarding risk factors, age, acute physiology, chronic health evaluation II score, resistant organisms (especially XDR), and being a non-trauma patient increased the risk of mortality.

Implementation of the World Health Organization surgical safety checklist at a university hospital in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: Compliance with the World Health Organization (WHO) surgical safety checklist may reduce preventable adverse events. However, compliance may be difficult to implement in Thailand. This study was conducted to examine compliance with the WHO checklist at a Thai university hospital. METHODS: A descriptive study was conducted among 4,340 patients undergoing surgery in nine departments from March to August 2009. The compliance rates were computed. RESULTS: The highest compliance rate (91.4%) during the sign-in period was with patients' confirmation of their identity, operative site, procedure, and consent. However, only 19.4% of the surgical sites were marked. In the time-out period, surgical teams had introduced themselves by name and role in 79% of the operations; and in 95.7% of the cases, the patient's name, the incision site, and the procedure had been confirmed. Antibiotic prophylaxis had been given within 60 min before the incision in 71% of the cases. For 83% of the operations, the surgeons reviewed crucial events whereas only 78.4% were reviewed by the anesthetists. Sterility had been confirmed by the operating room nurses for every patient, but the essential imaging was displayed at a rate of only 64.4%. In the sign-out period, nurses correctly confirmed the name of the procedure orally in 99.5% of the cases. Instrument, sponge, and needle counts were completed and the specimen was labeled in most cases, 96.8% and 97.6%, respectively. Equipment-related problems were identified in 4.4% of the cases, and 100% of them were addressed. The surgeon, anesthetist, and nurse reviewed the key concerns for recovery and management of the patient at the rate of 85.1%. CONCLUSIONS: The WHO checklist can be implemented in a developing country. However, compliance with some items was extremely low, reflecting different work patterns and cultural norms. Additional education and enforcement of checklist use is needed to improve compliance.