RESUMO
Five probable secondary cases of meningococcal disease were identified in microbiology laboratory workers in England and Wales during a 15-year period. All cases had prepared suspensions of Neisseria meningitidis outside a safety cabinet upto seven days before onset of illness. Relative risk in laboratory workers compared with the background adult population was 184 (95% CI 60-431). In view of the potentially serious outcome from this infection, a safety cabinet should always be used when preparing or working with suspensions of meningococci. Vaccination policy for microbiology laboratory workers should be reviewed.
Assuntos
Pessoal de Laboratório Médico , Infecções Meningocócicas/etiologia , Neisseria meningitidis/isolamento & purificação , Exposição Ocupacional , Adulto , Humanos , Incidência , Infecções Meningocócicas/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Polimorfismo de Fragmento de Restrição , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Reino Unido/epidemiologiaRESUMO
A survey of clinical microbiology laboratories in England and Wales found that in 12% of laboratories a class 1 microbiological safety cabinet was not always used for manipulating suspensions of live meningococci. The recommendation that a safety cabinet should always be used for such purposes needs reiteration and implementation.
Assuntos
Laboratórios Hospitalares/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoal de Laboratório Médico , Infecções Meningocócicas/epidemiologia , Infecções Meningocócicas/prevenção & controle , Microbiologia , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Humanos , Medição de Risco , Inquéritos e Questionários , País de Gales/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Repeat prescriptions for acid suppression therapy represent an important burden on health care resources. AIM: To determine the prevalence of acid suppression therapy and its indications by general practitioners (GPs) in a larger sample of practices than previous studies. METHOD: Practices in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly were invited to identify the number of patients on repeat prescription for acid suppression drugs in their practice, to review the indication for treatment in a sample of 50 patients, and to indicate the mode of review of these patients. RESULTS: Out of 77 practices, 42 (55%) participated in the study. Overall, 5% of patients were authorized to receive a repeat prescription for acid suppression drugs. Repeat rates varied between practices, from 1.68% to 11.11%. Repeat rates increased with age and were higher in men than in women. Only 41% of patients had a proven diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease or peptic ulcer. A review of notes was the most frequent way (36%) stated by GPs to review acid suppression therapy. CONCLUSION: The repeat rate found in our study was higher than that found in previous studies. A high proportion of older patients in Cornwall, as well as a continuing increase in the prescription of acid suppression drugs, may account for these results.
