Role of early foldscopy (microscopy) of endotracheal tube aspirates in deciding restricted empirical therapy in ventilated patients.

PURPOSE: Prevention of healthcare-associated infections (HAI) like ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) is particularly challenging especially in resource limited settings. Complex microbial interactions between patients and health care workers (HCWs) further complicate the situation, requiring a holistic approach for successful management. To bridge the gap between laboratory and intensive care unit (ICU) this study was conducted to find the role of hand-held microscope 'Foldscope' in restricting empirical therapy in intubated patients. METHODS: A total of 75 endotracheal aspirates (ETA) were collected from intubated patients in the ICU with (group 1) and without (group 2) VAP. For group 2, those with less than 48 â€‹h ventilation and with endotracheal tube (ETT) in situ were considered. Presence of biomass was detected through foldscope and ETA samples were processed for quantitative gram staining (QGS), semi-quantitative and quantitative culture. Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of Acinetobacter baumannii, the commonest isolate, was done and findings were statistically analysed. RESULTS: Biomass was present as seen through a foldscope in 45 cases (90%) in group 1 and 17 cases (68%) in group 2. In both the groups, A. baumannii was the most common isolate. Biomass production, significant QGS and culture was significantly more in group 1 (p â€‹< â€‹0.05). However, carbapenem resistant A. baumannii (CRAB) was comparably present in both the groups thus showing limited role of empirical carbapenem therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Early assessment of biomass in mechanically ventilated patients could provide guidance for empirical antibiotic therapy. Foldscope proved to be an excellent tool for restricting empirical therapy and driving antimicrobial stewardship in low resource settings.

The role of a flash of light for attenuation of venous cannulation pain: a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Venous cannulation is often performed without any analgesia, even though pain experienced during this procedure is at times very distressing. Various pharmacological and nonpharmacological measures have been tried with variable results to minimize venous cannulation pain. We designed the present study to evaluate the efficacy of a flash of light on attenuating venous cannulation pain. METHODS: Ninety adults (15-60 yr), ASA physical status I and II, of either sex, undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, were included in this prospective and randomized study. Patients were divided into three groups of 30 each. Group I (control); Group II (distraction): photographed without a flash of light; and Group III (flash): photographed with a flash of light just before venous cannulation of a vein on the dorsum of the nondominant hand. Immediately after the photograph, venous cannulation was performed using an 18-gauge cannula. RESULTS: Two patients from each group could not be cannulated on their first attempt and were therefore dropped from subsequent analysis. The incidence of venous cannulation pain in the flash group was lower, i.e., 50% (14 of 28) when compared to 100% (28 of 28) observed in the other two study groups (P < 0.01). Severity of venous cannulation pain as assessed by the Visual Analog Scale scores (between 0 and 100; where 0 = no pain and 100 = worst imaginable pain) presented as median (interquartile range) were reduced in the flash [10(20)] and distraction [20(10)] groups compared with the control group [40(20)] (P < 0.01). The severity of venous cannulation pain was also reduced in the flash group compared with the distraction group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: We conclude that a flash of light before venous cannulation is a safe, effective, and easy-to-use method for minimizing venous cannulation pain.