METHODS: All members of the Penang Private Medical Practitioners' Society were asked to complete a self-administered survey. Nonresponders were contacted after 3 weeks and received a telephone request after 6 weeks.
RESULTS: Of the 786 practitioners contacted, 669 considered themselves to be PCPs, including 279 (42%) who responded to the survey. Adult males with prostatitis-like symptoms typically constitute <1% of the patients seen by PCPs. Most PCPs (72%) believe that prostatitis-like symptoms are caused by bacterial infection. 61% of PCPs base their diagnosis of prostatitis-like symptoms on clinical history, a physical examination and dipstick urinalysis. Standard management was to prescribe 1 or 2 courses of antimicrobials.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the 8.7% prevalence found in a previous survey in this population, prostatitis remains underdiagnosed in Malaysia. In contrast to many other clinical settings, urologists in Malaysia see a large proportion of newly diagnosed and treatment-naive prostatitis patients, providing an opportunity for clinical diagnostic and treatment studies.
AIMS OF THE REVIEW: To critically anayze the literature for the botany, traditional uses, phytochemistry, pharmacology, toxicity, and clinical trials of P. sarmentosum in order to provide a scientific consensus for further research and discovery of potential candidate drugs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The contents of this review were sourced from electronic databases including PubMed, SciFinder, Web of Science, Science Direct, Elsevier, Google Scholar, Chinese Knowledge On frastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, Chinese Scientific and Technological Periodical Database (VIP), Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), Cochrane Controlled register of Clinical Trials, Clinical Trials. gov, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. Chinese medicine books published over the years were used to elucidate the traditional uses of P. sarmentosum and additional information was also collected from Yao Zhi website (https://db.yaozh.com/).
RESULTS: Phytochemical analyses of the chemical constituents of P. sarmentosum include essential oil, alkaloids, flavonoids, lignans, and steroids. The literature supports the ethnomedicinal uses of P. sarmentosum for the treatment of cold, gastritis, and rheumatoid joint pain, and further confirms its relatively new pharmacological activities, including anti-inflammatory, antineoplastic, and antipyretic activities. Other biological roles such as anti-osteoporosis, antibacterial, antidepressant, anti-atherosclerotic, and hypoglycemic activities have also been reported. However, the methodologies employed in individual studies are limited.
CONCLUSIONS: There is convincing evidence from both in vitro and in vivo studies supporting the traditional use of P. sarmentosum and it is imperative that natural bioactive compounds are examined further. More efforts should be focused on the pharmacodynamic constituents of P. sarmentosum to provide practical basis for quality control, and additional studies are needed to understand the mechanism of their action. Further studies on the comprehensive evaluation of medicinal quality and understandings of serum chemistry, multi-target network pharmacology, and molecular docking technology of P. sarmentosum are of great importance and should be considered.
OBJECTIVES: We assessed the effectiveness and safety of antimicrobial (antiseptic or antibiotic) dressings in reducing CVC-related infections in newborn infants. Had there been relevant data, we would have evaluated the effects of antimicrobial dressings in different subgroups, including infants who received different types of CVCs, infants who required CVC for different durations, infants with CVCs with and without other antimicrobial modifications, and infants who received an antimicrobial dressing with and without a clearly defined co-intervention.
SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group (CNRG). We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (EBCHOST), CINAHL and references cited in our short-listed articles using keywords and MeSH headings, up to September 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared an antimicrobial CVC dressing against no dressing or another dressing in newborn infants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using the standard methods of the CNRG. Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of the retrieved records. We expressed our results using risk difference (RD) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS: Out of 173 articles screened, three studies were included. There were two comparisons: chlorhexidine dressing following alcohol cleansing versus polyurethane dressing following povidone-iodine cleansing (one study); and silver-alginate patch versus control (two studies). A total of 855 infants from level III neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) were evaluated, 705 of whom were from a single study. All studies were at high risk of bias for blinding of care personnel or unclear risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessors. There was moderate-quality evidence for all major outcomes.The single study comparing chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing against polyurethane dressing/povidone-iodine cleansing showed no significant difference in the risk of CRBSI (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.65; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; 655 infants, moderate-quality evidence) and sepsis without a source (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.52; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.06; 705 infants, moderate-quality evidence). There was a significant reduction in the risk of catheter colonisation favouring chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing group (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86; RD -0.09, 95% CI -0.15 to -0.03; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 11, 95% CI 7 to 33; 655 infants, moderate-quality evidence). However, infants in the chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing group were significantly more likely to develop contact dermatitis, with 19 infants in the chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing group having developed contact dermatitis compared to none in the polyurethane dressing/povidone-iodine cleansing group (RR 43.06, 95% CI 2.61 to 710.44; RD 0.06, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.08; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 17, 95% CI 13 to 33; 705 infants, moderate-quality evidence). The roles of chlorhexidine dressing in the outcomes reported were unclear, as the two assigned groups received different co-interventions in the form of different skin cleansing agents prior to catheter insertion and during each dressing change.In the other comparison, silver-alginate patch versus control, the data for CRBSI were analysed separately in two subgroups as the two included studies reported the outcome using different denominators: one using infants and another using catheters. There were no significant differences between infants who received silver-alginate patch against infants who received standard line dressing in CRBSI, whether expressed as the number of infants (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.78; RD -0.12, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.09; 1 study, 50 participants, moderate-quality evidence) or as the number of catheters (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.89; RD -0.05, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.10; 1 study, 118 participants, moderate-quality evidence). There was also no significant difference between the two groups in mortality (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.05; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.05; two studies, 150 infants, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). No adverse skin reaction was recorded in either group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on moderate-quality evidence, chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol skin cleansing reduced catheter colonisation, but made no significant difference in major outcomes like sepsis and CRBSI compared to polyurethane dressing/povidone-iodine cleansing. Chlorhexidine dressing/alcohol cleansing posed a substantial risk of contact dermatitis in preterm infants, although it was unclear whether this was contributed mainly by the dressing material or the cleansing agent. While silver-alginate patch appeared safe, evidence is still insufficient for a recommendation in practice. Future research that evaluates antimicrobial dressing should ensure blinding of caregivers and outcome assessors and ensure that all participants receive the same co-interventions, such as the skin cleansing agent. Major outcomes like sepsis, CRBSI and mortality should be assessed in infants of different gestation and birth weight.