Violence against physicians in Jordan: An analytical cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: High numbers of violence incidents against physicians are reported annually in both developing and developed countries. In Jordan, studies conducted on healthcare workers involved small number of physicians and showed higher percentages of violence exposure when compared to other investigations from the Middle East. This is a large study aiming to comprehensively analyze the phenomenon in the physicians' community to optimize future strategies countering it. METHODS: The study has a cross sectional, questionnaire-based design. It targeted 969 doctors from different types of healthcare Jordanian institutions in Amman, between May to July, 2019. The questionnaire was designed to evaluate properties of reported abuse cases in terms of abusers, timing, and type of abuse, in addition to the consequences of this abuse. RESULTS: Prevalence of exposure to violence in the last year among doctors was 63.1% (611 doctors). 423 (67.2%) of male doctors had an experience of being abused during the last 12 months, compared to 188 (55.3%) of females (p< 0.001). Governmental centers showed the highest prevalence. Among 356 doctors working in governmental medical centers, 268 (75.3%) reported being abused (p< 0.001), and they were more abused verbally (63.5%) and physically (10.4%) compared to other medical sectors (p <0.001). The mean score of how worried doctors are regarding violence at their workplace from 1 to 5 was 3.1 ± 1.3, and only 129 (13.3%) believed that they are protected by law. CONCLUSIONS: The study emphasized on the higher rate of violence against physicians in the governmental sector, in addition to the negative effect of abuse on their performance. Moreover, male physicians had higher incidence of workplace abuse. Therefore, strategies that ease and promote the real application of anti-violence policies should become our future target.

A case of Brucella melitensis endocarditis in a patient with cardiovascular implantable electronic device.

BACKGROUND: Brucellosis is a bacterial infection, caused by the nonmotile gram-negative aerobic coccobacilli. The clinical manifestation of brucellosis is variable, ranging from mild disease to severe disease. The gold standard test to confirm the diagnosis of brucellosis is assaying blood, bone marrow, or other body fluids or by tissue culture. Preferred first-line treatment in adults with uncomplicated, nonlocalized disease consists of doxycycline-aminoglycoside combination. The recommended duration of treatment is 6 weeks. Cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection caused by brucellosis is rare and has been reported in a few case study series. We report a case of Brucella melitensis infection of CIED where, contrary to most authorities recommending removal of device, because of the patient's multiple comorbid conditions and age, an attempt was made to keep the device and place the patient on lifelong prophylaxis treatment. CASE REPORT: A 70-year-old Kuwaiti male, with a background history of Type 2 diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and sick sinus syndrome with a pacemaker fixed 1 year prior to his presentation, was diagnosed as having brucellosis. He was initially started on rifampicin and doxycycline. A transesophageal echo showed no evidence of vegetations seen at aortic valve or mitral valve. The two pacing leads, one in right atrium appendage and the other in right valve apex, looked smooth and clean with no clear adherence. Cotrimoxazole and gentamicin were added, per the 2015 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis. The plan was to treat the patient with an aminoglycoside for the first 3 weeks, and then de-escalate to three drugs. The patient's fever subsided for several days following treatment, and subsequent blood cultures showed sterilization of bloodstream. He developed an acute kidney injury from aminoglycosides, which required 2 months of inpatient dialysis treatment. He was later discharged after completing a total of 3 months of antibiotic treatment. At the time of discharge, the patient's Brucella titer was <1:160. The patient was discharged with a 2-month supply of rifampin and doxycycline. CONCLUSION: In all published studies on Brucella infective endocarditis with a cardiovascular implantable device, the recommendation was for device removal and extended treatment with doxycycline combined with rifampin and/or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, plus parenteral aminoglycosides for the first 3 weeks. There have been two cases in the literature that have studied CIED infected with brucellosis where an attempt was made to retain the device. In both cases, relapse occurred upon discontinuation of treatment. It is not clear whether lifelong antibiotic suppression treatment would prevent relapse.