RESUMO
Objectives: This research aimed to determine the fluoride levels in commercially available bottled waters and assess the accuracy of the fluoride levels labels on the bottles. Methods: We obtained the labels from 28 water bottles from markets in Almadinah Almunawwarah. Water samples were diluted with an equal volume of total ionic strength adjustment buffer at the General Administration for Water Services. The electrode potential of each sample was then directly compared to standard fluoride solutions. For each sample, two readings were taken, and the average was recorded. Fluoride-ion levels were determined using a fluoride-ion-selective electrode and a digital readout ion meter. Results: On average, the mean fluoride levels in the labelled bottles were 0.94 ± 0.14 PPM. The level of the actual fluoride content was 1.13 ± 0.31 PPM. Inconsistencies between the brand labels and true levels of fluoride were detected. Only one brand of bottled water was comparable in terms of the fluoride levels on the labels and the analysed fluoride levels. Only 85.71% of the brands tested had fluoride levels within the permissible fluoride range (0.6-1.5 PPM), 10.71% had fluoride levels above the permissible fluoride range, and 3.57% had fluoride levels below the permissible fluoride range. Conclusions: In the KSA, most brands of bottled waters had fluoride levels above the ideal levels that are vital to the prevention of dental caries. There were differences in the fluoride levels recorded on the labels and the true levels determined in the laboratory. Fluoride levels must be accurately reported if we are to achieve necessary aesthetic and cosmetic benefits. Bottled water must meet critical quality standards to avoid the negative consequences of higher fluoride levels. Dentists and parents should be aware of this discrepancy.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Short-term peripheral venous catheters-related bloodstream infections (PVCR-BSIs) rates have not been systematically studied, and data on their incidence by number of device-days is not available. METHODS: Prospective, surveillance study on PVCR-BSI conducted from September 1st, 2013 to 31st Mays, 2019 in 246 intensive care units (ICUs), members of the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC), from 83 hospitals in 52 cities of 14 countries in the Middle East (Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Palestine, Sudan, Tunisia, Turkey, and United Arab Emirates). We applied U.S. RESULTS: We followed 31,083 ICU patients for 189,834 bed-days and 202,375 short term peripheral venous catheter (PVC)-days. We identified 470 PVCR-BSIs, amounting to a rate of 2.32/1000 PVC-days. Mortality in patients with PVC but without PVCR-BSI was 10.38%, and 29.36% in patients with PVC and PVCR-BSI. The mean length of stay in patients with PVC but without PVCR-BSI was 5.94 days, and 16.84 days in patients with PVC and PVCR-BSI. The microorganism profile showed 55.2 % of gram-positive bacteria, with Coagulase-negative Staphylococci (31%) and Staphylococcus aureus (14%) being the predominant ones. Gram-negative bacteria accounted for 39% of cases, and included: Escherichia coli (7%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (8%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5%), Enterobacter spp. (3%), and others (29.9%), such as Serratia marcescens. CONCLUSIONS: PVCR-BSI rates found in our ICUs were much higher than rates published from USA, Australia, and Italy. Infection prevention programs must be implemented to reduce the incidence of PVCR-BSIs.
