RESUMEN
The American Association of Equine Practitioners strongly advocates evidence-based intestinal strongyle control in horses. It recommends targeted treatment of all heavy egg shedders (>500 eggs per gram (EPG) of feces), while the low shedders (0-200 EPG) are left untreated. As 50-75% of adult horses in a herd are low shedders, preventing them from unnecessary anthelmintic exposure is critical for tackling resistance. There are various fecal egg count (FEC) techniques with many modifications and variations in use, but none is identified as a gold standard. The hypothesis of the study was that the diagnostic performance of 12 commonly used quantitation methodologies (three techniques with four variants) differs. In this regard, method comparison studies were performed using polystyrene beads as proxy for intestinal strongyle eggs. Mini-FLOTAC-based variants had the lowest coefficient of variation (CV%) in bead recovery, whereas McMaster variants had the highest. All four variants of Mini-FLOTAC and the NaNO3 1.33 specific gravity variant of modified Wisconsin followed a linear fit with R2 > 0.95. In contrast, the bead standard replicates for modified McMaster variants dispersed from the regression curve, causing a lower R2. The Mini-FLOTAC method seems less influenced by the choice of floatation solution and has better repeatability parameters and linearity for bead standard recovery. For FEC tests with high R2 (>0.95) but that underestimated the true bead count, a correction factor (CF) was determined to estimate the true count. Finally, the validity of CF was analyzed for 5 tests with R2 > 0.95 to accurately quantify intestinal strongyle eggs from 40 different horses. Overall, this study identified FEC methodologies with the highest diagnostic performance. The limitations in standardizing routine FEC tests are highlighted, and the importance of equalization of FEC results is emphasized for promoting uniformity in the implementation of parasite control guidelines.
RESUMEN
AIMS: The use of fluoroscopy in orthopaedic surgery creates risk of radiation exposure to surgeons. Appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) can help mitigate this. The primary aim of this study was to assess if current radiation protection in orthopaedic trauma is safe. The secondary aims were to describe normative data of radiation exposure during common orthopaedic procedures, evaluate ways to improve any deficits in protection, and validate the use of electronic personal dosimeters (EPDs) in assessing radiation dose in orthopaedic surgery. METHODS: Radiation exposure to surgeons during common orthopaedic trauma operations was prospectively assessed using EPDs and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Normative data for each operation type were calculated and compared to recommended guidelines. RESULTS: Current PPE appears to mitigate more than 90% of ionizing radiation in orthopaedic fluoroscopic procedures. There is a higher exposure to the inner thigh during seated procedures. EPDs provided results for individual procedures. CONCLUSION: PPE currently used by surgeons in orthopaedic trauma theatre adequately reduces radiation exposure to below recommended levels. Normative data per trauma case show specific anatomical areas of higher exposure, which may benefit from enhanced radiation protection. EPDs can be used to assess real-time radiation exposure in orthopaedic surgery. There may be a role in future medical wearables for orthopaedic surgeons.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(11):907-912.