METHOD: The dispensing system is based on an Arduino circuit breadboard where an ATmega328p microcontroller was pre-installed. To sense the proximity, a light-dependent resistor (LDR) is used where the laser light is to be blocked after the placement of human hands, hence produced a sharp decrease in the LDR sensor value. Once the LDR sensor value exceeds the lower threshold, the pump is actuated by the microcontroller, and the sanitizer dispenses through the nozzle.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A novel design and subsequent fabrication of a low-cost, touchless, automated sanitizer dispenser to be used in public places, was demonstrated. The overall performance of the manufactured device was analyzed based on the cost and power consumption, and environmental factors by deploying it in busy public places as well as in indoor environment in major cities in Bangladesh, and found to be more efficient and cost-effective compared to other dispensers available in the market. A comprehensive discussion on this unique design compared to the conventional ultrasonic and infra-red based dispensers, is presented to show its suitability over the commercial ones. The guidelines of the World Health Organization are followed for the preparation of sanitizer liquid. A clear demonstration of the circuitry connections is presented herein, which facilitates the interested individual to manufacture a cost-effective dispenser device in a relatively short time and use it accordingly. Conclusion: This study reveals that the LDR-based automated hand sanitizer dispenser system is a novel concept, and it is cost-effective compared to the conventional ones. The presented device is expected to play a key role in contactless hand disinfection in public places, and reduce the spread of infectious diseases in society.
Methods: A parallel randomised controlled single blinded study was conducted with a sample size of 70 patients who were randomised into two groups. One group underwent MRM using ultrasonic dissector (Group A) and the other one using electrocautery (Group B). Intra- and post-operative outcomes were compared.
Results: Group A had an average operating time of 30.86 min, which was statistically less than that of Group B. The mean mop count and the daily drain output in Group A were less as compared to Group B and the differences were statistically significant. Drain was removed early in Group A as compared to Group B. However, post-operative pain scores and seroma formation were not statistically significant among the two groups.
Conclusion: Ultrasonic dissector group had significantly lesser intra-operative bleeding, operating time and post-operative drain output when compared to electrocautery group. However, the two groups had no significant difference in post-operative pain scores and seroma formation.