scholarly journals Timing is Everything: Discharge Teaching to Parents in Pediatric Outpatient Surgery

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Boulder
2006 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 54-55
Author(s):  
HEIDI SPLETE

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Caredda ◽  
Stefano Guolo ◽  
Silvia Rinaldi ◽  
Carla Brusco ◽  
Massimiliano Raponi

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s305-s305
Author(s):  
Karoline Sperling ◽  
Amy Priddy ◽  
Nila Suntharam ◽  
Adam Karlen

Background: With increasing medical tourism and international healthcare, emerging multidrug resistant organisms (MDROs) or “superbugs” are becoming more prevalent. These MDROs are unique because they are resistant to antibiotics and can carry special resistance mechanisms. In April 2019, our hospital was notified that a superbug, New Delhi Metallo-β-lactamase(NDM)–producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), was identified in a patient who had been transferred to another hospital after being at our hospital for 3 weeks. Our facility had a CRE admission screening protocol in place since 2013, but this patient did not meet the criteria to be screened on admission. Methods: The infection prevention (IP) team consulted with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) and gathered stakeholders to discuss containment strategies using the updated 2019 CDC Interim Guidance for Public Health Response to Contain Novel or Targeted Multidrug-resistant Organisms (MDROs) to determine whether transmission to other patients had occurred. NDM CRE was classified under tier 2 organisms, meaning those primarily associated with healthcare settings and not commonly identified in the region, and we used this framework to conduct an investigation. A point-prevalence study was done in an intensive care unit that consisted of rectal screening of 7 patients for both CRE and Candida auris, another emerging MDRO. These swabs were sent to the Antibiotic Resistance Laboratory Network (ARLN) Central Regional Lab at MDH for testing. An on-site infection control risk assessment was done by the MDH Infection Control Assessment and Response (ICAR) team. Results: All 7 patients were negative for both CRE and C. auris, and no further screening was done. During the investigation, it was discovered that the patient had had elective ambulatory surgery outside the United States in March 2019. The ICAR team assessment provided overall positive feedback to the nursing unit about isolation procedures, cleaning products, and hand hygiene product accessibility. Opportunities included set-up of soiled utility room and updating our process to the 2019 MDH recommendation to screen patients for CRE and C. auris on admission who have been hospitalized, had outpatient surgery, or hemodialysis outside the United States in the previous year. Conclusions: Point-prevalence study results showed no transmission of CRE and highlighted the importance of standard precautions. This event supports the MDH recommendation to screen for CRE any patients who have been hospitalized, had outpatient surgery, or had hemodialysis outside the United States in the previous year.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None


1994 ◽  
Vol 160 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick O Stephens
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Natalia Veronica Giorgi ◽  
Estefania Nahir Pintos ◽  
Pablo Rosón Rodríguez ◽  
Luis Ignacio Garegnani ◽  
Juan Víctor Ariel Franco

2021 ◽  
pp. 105566562098490
Author(s):  
Matthew Ranzer ◽  
Edward Daniele ◽  
Chad A. Purnell

Objective: Few studies have focused on perioperative management of cleft lip repair. We sought to evaluate the available data on this topic to create evidence-based clinical guidelines. Design: Systematic review, meta-analysis. Methods: A PubMed search was performed focusing on perioperative management of cleft lip repair. Studies were included if they included comparative data. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Main Outcome Measures: Systematic review of literature regarding wound closure, postoperative arm restraints, perioperative antibiotics, outpatient or ambulatory surgery, or feeding restrictions postoperatively. Results: Twenty-three articles met inclusion criteria after initial screening of 3103 articles. This included 8 articles on wound closure, 2 on postoperative restraints, one on perioperative antibiotics, 6 on outpatient surgery, and 6 on postoperative feeding. Meta-analysis could be performed on dehiscence rates with postoperative feeding regimen and readmission rates after outpatient versus inpatient lip repair. There were few studies with low risk of bias. Outpatient cleft lip repair does not increase readmission (odds ratio [OR]: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.28-3.07). Allowing postoperative breastfeeding or bottle-feeding does not increase dehiscence (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.19-1.95). There was no evidence of publication bias. Conclusion: Within the limitations of available data, there is no evidence of a clearly superior closure material. The evidence does not support use of postoperative arm restraints. The evidence does not support the use of preoperative nasal swabs for antibiotic guidance. With careful patient selection, outpatient cleft lip repair appears safe. The evidence supports immediate breastfeeding or bottle-feeding after cleft lip repair.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document