ABSTRACT
Background: Contrast agents have long been used for the imaging of anatomic boundaries and to explore normal and abnormal findings in X-ray based imaging technique. These agents are not completely devoid of risk. Adverse effects from administration of contrast media vary from minor physiological disturbance to rare life threatening situation.Methods: A cross-sectional retrospective observational study over one-year duration from 1st August 2015 to 31st July 2016 was conducted at radiology department of a Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Government Medical College and Teaching hospital, Rajkot, Gujarat. Adverse drug reactions were analyzed to study the nature of reactions caused by iodinated contrast agents. The temporal relationship of time of administration of contrast agents to the occurrence of adverse reaction was analyzed and classified as immediate or delayed type of reaction.Results: Out of 868 patients that were analysed 15 out of 497 male patients and 11 out of 371 female patients developed adverse reaction. Age range of patients that developed reactions was 20-55 years. Most common adverse drug reaction occurred in our study was nausea and vomiting which was treated by parenteral Ondansetron. All the reactions were found to be 憄robable� in causality as per WHO causality assessment scale and Naranjo抯 algorithm.Conclusions: Physicians performing diagnostic or therapeutic procedures with contrast agents must be aware of the risk, preventability & treatment so that reactions can be prevented. Sensitization of physicians is required to increase reporting of adverse drug reactions occurred due to radiocontrast agents.
ABSTRACT
Background: Prophylactic antimicrobials have an important adjuvant role in the prevention of Surgical Site Infection (SSI), which is one of the most preventable causes of post-operative complication. In India, due to lack of adequate information and guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery there is a need to generate baseline data on the pattern of use of prophylactic antimicrobials. Aims & Objective: This study is aimed to analyze the pattern of surgical chemoprophylaxis and surgical site infection (SSI) rate in patients who underwent elective orthopedic surgical procedure. Material and Methods: A prospective, observational study was performed on patients undergoing surgery, in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Data were collected in a pro-forma which included the patients’ details, prescriptions from date of admission to discharge or any other outcome and operative notes. Surgical site infection as defined by Centre for Disease Control criteria was recorded. Results: Total 305 patients were enrolled over a period of one year. In 237 (77.70%) patients antimicrobials prescribed by generic name. In preoperatively and intraoperatively, all the patients received parenteral antimicrobial. Postoperatively, 294 (96.40%) patients received only parenteral antimicrobials while in 11 (3.60%) patients received parenteral antimicrobials followed by oral antimicrobials. Preoperatively antimicrobials started 12 hours prior to surgery. Average duration of antimicrobials given postoperatively was 5.05 ± 1.14 days. Third generation Cephalosporins and Aminoglycosides were prescribed most frequently. Average number of antimicrobials used per patient was 4.40 ± 1.05. In follow up 37 (13.03%) patients developed SSI and most common isolated organism was Staphylococcus aureus. Conclusion: Surgical chemoprophylaxis was inappropriate in terms of choice of antimicrobial agent, timing of administration as well as the total duration of prescription, in majority of the cases, leading to higher SSI. Interventions are warranted to promote the development, dissemination and adoption of evidence based guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis.