The Experts below are selected from a list of 386376 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
M C Kelsey - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the use of the wound scoring method aSepsis in postoperative wound surveillance
Journal of Hospital Infection, 1990Co-Authors: A P R Wilson, C Weavill, James Burridge, M C KelseyAbstract:Abstract For the purposes of wound surveillance programmes and clinical trials, a wound scoring method, ASepsis, makes assessment of wound Sepsis more objective and reproducible by allotting points both for the appearance of the wound in the first week and for the clinical consequences of infection. ASepsis was compared with other definitions of wound infection in 1029 surgical patients and its suitability for surveillance and detection of risk factors were examined. Satisfactory healing was recorded in 867 patients, disturbance of healing in 74 and minor, moderate and severe wound infection in 41, 24 and 23 patients respectively. An ASepsis score over 20 points was more sensitive and as specific as the presence of pus as an indicator of changes in management resulting from infection. Multiple regression analysis of ASepsis scores indicated that operation type, ward, degree of contamination, age, body mass index, and preoperative stay in hospital were significant risk factors. In matching 52 infected patients with uninfected controls, any wound score over 10 points was associated with a significant delay in discharge from hospital (median 3 days, P
James Burridge - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the use of the wound scoring method aSepsis in postoperative wound surveillance
Journal of Hospital Infection, 1990Co-Authors: A P R Wilson, C Weavill, James Burridge, M C KelseyAbstract:Abstract For the purposes of wound surveillance programmes and clinical trials, a wound scoring method, ASepsis, makes assessment of wound Sepsis more objective and reproducible by allotting points both for the appearance of the wound in the first week and for the clinical consequences of infection. ASepsis was compared with other definitions of wound infection in 1029 surgical patients and its suitability for surveillance and detection of risk factors were examined. Satisfactory healing was recorded in 867 patients, disturbance of healing in 74 and minor, moderate and severe wound infection in 41, 24 and 23 patients respectively. An ASepsis score over 20 points was more sensitive and as specific as the presence of pus as an indicator of changes in management resulting from infection. Multiple regression analysis of ASepsis scores indicated that operation type, ward, degree of contamination, age, body mass index, and preoperative stay in hospital were significant risk factors. In matching 52 infected patients with uninfected controls, any wound score over 10 points was associated with a significant delay in discharge from hospital (median 3 days, P
A P R Wilson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the use of the wound scoring method aSepsis in postoperative wound surveillance
Journal of Hospital Infection, 1990Co-Authors: A P R Wilson, C Weavill, James Burridge, M C KelseyAbstract:Abstract For the purposes of wound surveillance programmes and clinical trials, a wound scoring method, ASepsis, makes assessment of wound Sepsis more objective and reproducible by allotting points both for the appearance of the wound in the first week and for the clinical consequences of infection. ASepsis was compared with other definitions of wound infection in 1029 surgical patients and its suitability for surveillance and detection of risk factors were examined. Satisfactory healing was recorded in 867 patients, disturbance of healing in 74 and minor, moderate and severe wound infection in 41, 24 and 23 patients respectively. An ASepsis score over 20 points was more sensitive and as specific as the presence of pus as an indicator of changes in management resulting from infection. Multiple regression analysis of ASepsis scores indicated that operation type, ward, degree of contamination, age, body mass index, and preoperative stay in hospital were significant risk factors. In matching 52 infected patients with uninfected controls, any wound score over 10 points was associated with a significant delay in discharge from hospital (median 3 days, P
Ki Tae Kwon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
risk factors and pathogenic significance of severe Sepsis and septic shock in 2286 patients with gram negative bacteremia
Journal of Infection, 2011Co-Authors: Cheolin Kang, Jaehoon Song, Doo Ryeon Chung, Kyong Ran Peck, Kwan Soo Ko, Joonsup Yeom, Hyun Kyun Ki, Sookin Jung, Hyunha Chang, Ki Tae KwonAbstract:Summary Background The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for development of severe Sepsis or septic shock and to evaluate the clinical impact of severe Sepsis on outcome in patients with gram-negative bacteremia (GNB). Methods From the database of a nationwide surveillance for bacteremia, patients with GNB were analyzed. Data of patients with severe Sepsis or septic shock were compared with those of patient with Sepsis. Results Of 2286 patients with GNB, 506 (22.1%) fulfilled the criteria of severe Sepsis or septic shock. Factors associated with severe Sepsis or septic shock in the multivariate analysis included renal disease, indwelling urinary catheter, hematologic malignancy, and neutropenia. The 30-day mortality of patients with severe Sepsis or septic shock was significantly higher than that of patients with Sepsis (39.5% [172/435] vs. 7.4% [86/1170]; P Escherichia coli , which were risk factors of development of severe Sepsis or septic shock, were also found to be strong predictors of mortality. Severe Sepsis or septic shock was a significant factor associated with mortality (OR, 3.34; 95% CI, 2.35–4.74), after adjustment for other variables predicting poor prognosis. Conclusions Severe Sepsis or septic shock was a common finding in patients with GNB, predicting a higher mortality rate. Renal disease and indwelling urinary catheter were the most important risk factors significantly associated with severe Sepsis or septic shock among patients with GNB.
Patrick T. Rohner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the role of larval substrate specialization and female oviposition in mediating species diversity of closely related sepsid flies diptera sepsidae
European Journal of Endocrinology, 2019Co-Authors: Amelie Laux, Wolf U Blanckenhorn, Natalia Gourgoulianni, Jeannine Roy, Alexandra Wegmann, Patrick T. RohnerAbstract:Coprophagous insect communities play a critical role in the decomposition of vertebrate dung and provide ecosystem functions fundamental to modern agriculture. While the ecology of dung beetles is rather well understood, niche differentiation in coprophagous flies is poorly studied. Sepsid flies (Diptera: Sepsidae) are a vital part of the European community of coprophages, with 6-7 widespread species of Sepsis often found co-occurring in the same pasture. To advance our ecological understanding of the mechanisms that enable species to coexist, we investigated the oviposition preferences and larval performance of 7 common species of Sepsis in the dung of different large domestic and wild mammals. Substrate preferences and subsequent performance of larvae in laboratory experiments did not vary greatly. All species did very well on cow dung, the most common substrate in Central Europe, but also on dung of horse and wild boar. In contrast, flies did not prefer or grow well in dung of red and roe deer, two of the most common wild vertebrates. Thus there were only minor differences among the species tested along the specialist-generalist (dung) gradient, indicating that differences in the choice of oviposition sites by the adults of the different fly species and larval performance do not constitute a major axis of ecological differentiation. Nevertheless, there was a positive correlation between substrate choice and larval performance indicating the preference of gravid females for particular oviposition sites is adaptive. We conclude that sepsids are common in Europe because they are well adapted to the dung of herbivorous livestock rather than wild animals. Nevertheless, specialization on particular types of dung does not define the niche of Sepsis dung flies and hence plays a minor role in mediating their species diversity.
