Methods: A total of 11 isolates from respiratory cultures in intensive care unit of a 24 bed tertiary hospital obtained over a one months period and one isolate obtained from the nebuliser during environmental screening were investigated. The bacteria were identified by Phoenix 100 system. The clonal relatedness was evaluated by PFGE and semi-automated repetitive sequence-based PCR. Genotyping tests were repeated for 10 serial subcultures.
Results: PFGE and DiversiLab yielded 10 genotypic profiles for 12 isolates. Four to eight different genotypes were observed from 10 subcultures of the same isolate.
Conclusion: We conclude that, high genetic diversity and supposed multiclonal appearance of the outbreak isolates may be due to changing profiles during subcultures most probably depending on hypermutation.
AIM: Our aim is to develop and validate a pharmaceutical assessment screening tool (PAST) to guide medical ward pharmacists in our local hospitals to effectively prioritise patient care.
METHOD: This study involved 2 major phases; (1) development of PAST through literature review and group discussion, (2) validation of PAST using a three-round Delphi survey. Twenty-four experts were invited by email to participate in the Delphi survey. In each round, experts were required to rate the relevance and completeness of PAST criteria and were given chance for open feedback. The 75% consensus benchmark was set and criteria with achieved consensus were retained in PAST. Experts' suggestions were considered and added into PAST for rating. After each round, experts were provided with anonymised feedback and results from the previous round.
RESULTS: Three Delphi rounds resulted in the final tool (rearranged as mnemonic 'STORIMAP'). STORIMAP consists of 8 main criteria with 29 subcomponents. Marks are allocated for each criteria in STORIMAP which can be combined to a total of 15 marks. Patient acuity level is determined based on the final score and clerking priority is assigned accordingly.
CONCLUSION: STORIMAP potentially serves as a useful tool to guide medical ward pharmacists to prioritise patients effectively, hence establishing acuity-based pharmaceutical care.
METHODS: Data were retrospectively extracted from all the Chemotherapy Return Forms in 2016, which is a compulsory documentation accompanying each return of parenteral chemotherapy regimen. The following data were extracted: patient's diagnosis, gender, location of treatment (i.e. ward/daycare clinic), start date of chemotherapy regimen, type of cytotoxic drug returned, dose of cytotoxic drug returned, number of cytotoxic drug preparations returned and reason for return as well as whether the returned cytotoxic drug preparations could be re-dispensed. The cost of wastage was calculated based on the cost per mg (or per unit) of the particular returned cytotoxic drug.
RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-nine cases of returned chemotherapy regimen comprising of 231 parenteral cytotoxic drug preparations were analysed. The total cost of returned chemotherapy regimen for 2016 was €3632, with €756 (20.8%) worth of chemotherapy regimens returned due to preventable reasons and €2876 (79.2%) worth of chemotherapy regimens returned due to non-preventable reasons. Approximately 50% of cases returned chemotherapy regimen were due to deterioration of patient's clinical condition and another 24.5% of cases of returned chemotherapy regimen were attributed to adverse drug reactions.
CONCLUSION: Wastage associated to non-preventable reasons such as adverse drug reactions and preventable causes like refusal of patients can be further reduced by using newer healthcare innovations and establishment of written institutional protocols or standard operating procedures as references for in-charge healthcare personnel when cytotoxic drug-related issues occur. Adoption of cost-saving strategies that have been proven by studies could further improve current cost containment strategies.
METHODOLOGY: This was a cross-sectional observational study done from November 2017 until December 2017 at ED Hospital Sultan Abdul Halim (HSAH), a 650-bedded tertiary hospital in the state of Kedah. All patients that were triaged to red zone, age 18 years and above, and involved in intra-hospital transfer to critical coronary unit, intensive care unit and wards were included. All cases were documented in proforma by the accompanying staff.
RESULTS: Among the 170 critically ill patients, only 29 patients (17.1%) experienced adverse events during intra-hospital transfer. The adverse events seen were hypotension (12.4%), desaturation (3.5%) and dislodged peripheral line (2.4%). Cardiorespiratory related diagnosis was the commonest presentation. Intra-hospital transfer during morning shift and evening shift has 79.5% (b=-1.59, OR=0.21, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.69, p=0.011) and 75.6% ((b=-1.41, OR=0.24, 95% CI: 0.08, 0.73, p=0.012) lesser odds of experiencing adverse events compare to night shift. Patients with vasopressor/inotropes had 9 times higher odds of experiencing adverse events during transportation, compared to patients with no vasopressor/inotropes (b=2.27, OR=9.70, 95% CI: 3.39, 27.72, p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Critical care patients who are involved in intrahospital transfer were at risk of adverse events such as hypotension, desaturation and dislodge peripheral line. Risk identification and maintaining level of care is important to minimize the adverse events during transfer. Patients had higher rates of adverse events if they were transferred during night shifts and on inotropic/vasopressor support.
METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on children with infantile esotropia aged 8-17 years old and their parents/guardians who attended two tertiary hospitals with a paediatric ophthalmology service from 2017 to 2018. The patients and parents answered the Intermittent Exotropia Questionnaire (IXTQ), translated into Malay, at the time of enrolment and three months after the surgery.
RESULTS: Thirty-four children and one (each) of their parents/guardians were enrolled. Thirteen (38.2%) children had esotropia with angles of deviation of more than 50 prism dioptres. A total of 33 (97.1%) children achieved successful alignment correction three months after surgery. Surgery significantly improved the total mean scores of the children, which were 62.87 (17.05) preoperatively and 87.13 (13.26) postoperatively (p<0.001). There was statistically improvement in the total mean scores in the parent/guardian group, which was 37.07 (22.01) preoperatively and 75.39 (22.09) postoperatively (p<0.001). The parents/guardians functional, psychosocial and surgery subscales also had a significant increment in the score postoperatively (p<0.001). Older children and children with poorer visual acuity on presentation had a lower score preoperatively, while girls scored better postoperatively (p<0.05). Mothers scored significantly lower preoperatively and postoperatively (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Surgery significantly improved the HRQoL score in Malaysian children with infantile esotropia and their parents/guardians. The score was significantly higher in female children after the surgery. Mothers exhibited poor scores before and after surgery.
METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted on hospitalised COVID-19 patients from April 2021 to June 2021 in a tertiary care centre. Ethical approval was taken from the Institutional Review Committee (Reference number: 2078/79/05). The hospital data were collected in the proforma by reviewing the patient's medical records during the study period of 2 months. Convenience sampling was used. Point estimate and 95% Confidence Interval were calculated.
RESULTS: Among 106 hospitalised COVID-19 patients, the prevalence of antibiotic use was 104 (98.11%) (95.52-100, 95% Confidence Interval). About 74 (71.15%) of patients received multiple antibiotics. The most common classes of antibiotics used were cephalosporins, seen in 85 (81.73%) and macrolides, seen in 57 (54.81%) patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of antibiotic use among hospitalised COVID-19 patients was found to be higher when compared to other studies conducted in similar settings.
KEYWORDS: antibiotics; bacterial infection; co-infection; COVID-19.