Article Sidebar

pdf
Date Published: 06/10/2023
Abstract Views: 107
Views pdf: 81
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v530i2.6835
Issue
Vol. 530 No. 2 (2023)
Section
Các bài báo
How to Cite
Nguyễn, Ảnh S. (2023). AFFECT OF AGE AND GERDER ON EFFECTIVE PROPHYLACTIC ANTIBIOTIC TREATMENT IN CLEAN SURGERY FOR OSTEOSYNTHESIS IN THE UPPER LIMB. Vietnam Medical Journal, 530(2). https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v530i2.6835

AFFECT OF AGE AND GERDER ON EFFECTIVE PROPHYLACTIC ANTIBIOTIC TREATMENT IN CLEAN SURGERY FOR OSTEOSYNTHESIS IN THE UPPER LIMB

Ảnh Sang Nguyễn1,
1 Military Hospital 175

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objectives: To survey on the relationship of age and gender factors to the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in clean surgery for osteosynthesis in the upper extremities, based on the ASEPSIS scale. Subjects and methods:. A prospective study from March 2022 to May 2023 at Military Hospital 175, surveying 62 patients (patients) who used prophylactic antibiotics in clean surgery to osteosynthesis. Results and Conclusion: The average age of the study group is 42.1 ± 17.01 years old. The youngest is 18 years old, and the oldest is 88 years old. Regarding gender, the proportion of male patients was higher than that of female patients, the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.01). The mean score of ASEPSIS in the age groups was different, but the difference was not statistically significant (ANOVA test, p > 0.05).

Article Details

Keywords

Prophylactic antibiotic, upper limb, age and gender, ASEPSIS scale.

References

1. Nguyễn Thị Thu Giang (2014), Bước đầu đánh giá hiệu quả của kháng sinh dự phòng Cefuroxim trong phẫu thuật cột sống tại Khoa Ngoại – Bệnh viện Đại học Y Hà Nội, Luận văn thạc sĩ dược học, Trường Đại học Dược Hà Nội.
2. Nguyễn Thanh Hải (2014), “Tỷ lệ mắc mới, tác nhân, chi phí điều trị và yếu tố nguy cơ của nhiễm khuẩn vết mổ tại bệnh viện đa khoa Thống Nhất Đồng Nai”, Y học Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, tập 18 (1), tr. 203-208.
3. Ashcroft G.S. (2002), “Androgen receptor-mediated inhibition of cutaneous wound healing”, J Clin Invest, vol. 110 (5), pp. 615-624.
4. Kaye K.S. (2005), “The effect of increasing age on the risk of surgical site infection”, J Infect Dis, vol. 191 (7), pp. 1056-1062.
5. Langelotz C. (2014), “Gender-specific differences in surgical site infections: An analysis of 438,050 surgical procedures from the German national nosocomial infections surveillance system”, Viszeralmedizin, vol. 30 (2), pp. 114-117.
6. Neumayer L. (2007), “Multivariable predictors of postoperative surgical site infection after general and vascular surgery: results from the patient safety in surgery study”, J Am Coll Surg, vol. 204 (6), pp. 1178-1187.
7. Pace S. (2020), “Impact of androgens on inflammation-related lipid mediator biosynthesis in innate immune cells”, Front Immunol, vol. 11, p. 1356.
8. Wilson A.P. (1986), “A scoring method (ASEPSIS) for postoperative wound infections for use in clinical trials of antibiotic prophylaxis”, Lancet, vol. 1 (8476), pp. 311-313.