Aboul Ella Hassanien (Abo)

BACKGROUND: Because central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) are a significant complication of central venous access, it is critical to prevent CLABSIs through the use of central line bundles. The purpose of this study was to take a snapshot of central venous access bundles in various countries.

METHODS: The participants in intensive care units (ICUs) completed a questionnaire that included information about the health center, infection control procedures, and central line maintenance. The countries were divided into 2 groups: those with a low or low-middle income and those with an upper-middle or high income.

RESULTS: Forty-three participants from 22 countries (46 hospitals, 85 ICUs) responded to the survey. Eight (17.4%) hospitals had no surveillance system for CLABSI. Approximately 7.1 % (n = 6) ICUs had no CLABSI bundle. Twenty ICUs (23.5%) had no dedicated checklist. The percentage of using ultrasonography during catheter insertion, transparent semi-permeable dressings, needleless connectors and single-use sterile pre-filled ready to use 0.9% NaCl were significantly higher in countries with higher and middle-higher income (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that there are significant differences in the central line bundles between low/low-middle income countries and upper-middle/high-income countries. Additional measures should be taken to address inequity in the management of vascular access in resource-limited countries.

n/a

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate anchorage control using miniscrews vs an Essix appliance in treatment of Class II malocclusion by distalization using the Carrière Motion Appliance (CMA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four postpubertal female patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion were randomly distributed into two equal groups. CMA was bonded in both groups, and one group was treated with miniscrews as anchorage (12 patients, mean age = 18.0 years) while the other group was treated with an Essix appliance as anchorage (12 patients, mean age = 17.8 years). For each patient, two cone-beam computed tomographic scans were obtained: one preoperatively and another after completion of distalization.

RESULTS: In the Essix appliance group, there was a statistically significant anterior movement (2.2 ± 1.43 mm) as well as proclination of the lower incisor (5.3° ± 4.0°), compared to a nonsignificant anterior movement (0.06 ± 1.45 mm) and proclination (0.86° ± 2.22°) in the miniscrew group. The amount of maxillary molar distalization was higher in the miniscrew group (2.57 ± 1.52 mm) than in the Essix appliance group (1.53 ± 1.11 mm); however, the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS: Miniscrews led to a decrease in the amount of anchorage loss in the mandibular incisors, both in terms of anterior movement and proclination.

PURPOSE: To evaluate differences in the subjective aniseikonia and stereoacuity in patients with axial anisometropia after full correction of the refractive error with spectacles, contact lenses, and refractive surgery.

METHODS: A prospective study was performed in Cairo University Hospitals on 20 patients with axial anisometropia caused by unilateral myopia > 5 D with > 4 D inter-ocular difference in spherical equivalent who were suitable candidates for excimer laser ablation (LASIK) or implantable collamer lens implantation (ICL). All patients had measurement of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), fusion, stereoacuity, and magnitude of aniseikonia with spectacles, contact lenses, and after surgery.

RESULTS: The mean age at time of surgery was 25.7 ± 3.1 years. There were no statistically significant differences in the BCVA or stereoacuity with spectacles, contact lenses, or after refractive surgery. Microkonia < 5%) was perceived with spectacles in 8 patients (40%) and remained unchanged in 7 of these 8 patients with contact lenses. Following LASIK (n = 11), there was an induced macrokonia < 2% in 4 patients (36%), persistent microkonia of 3% in 1 patient (9%), and no change in image size in 6 (55%) patients. Following ICL implantation (n = 9), there was a perceived macrokonia of 2% in 4 patients (44%), disappearance of microkonia in 1 patient (11%) and no change in 4 patients (44%).

CONCLUSIONS: Differences in BCVA, stereoacuity, and aniseikonia after correction of anisometropia by glasses, contact lens and surgery are both clinically and statistically insignificant. Retinal or neural adaptation might have a role in correction for differences in image size.

PURPOSE: To evaluate differences in the subjective aniseikonia and stereoacuity in patients with axial anisometropia after full correction of the refractive error with spectacles, contact lenses, and refractive surgery.

METHODS: A prospective study was performed in Cairo University Hospitals on 20 patients with axial anisometropia caused by unilateral myopia > 5 D with > 4 D inter-ocular difference in spherical equivalent who were suitable candidates for excimer laser ablation (LASIK) or implantable collamer lens implantation (ICL). All patients had measurement of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), fusion, stereoacuity, and magnitude of aniseikonia with spectacles, contact lenses, and after surgery.

RESULTS: The mean age at time of surgery was 25.7 ± 3.1 years. There were no statistically significant differences in the BCVA or stereoacuity with spectacles, contact lenses, or after refractive surgery. Microkonia < 5%) was perceived with spectacles in 8 patients (40%) and remained unchanged in 7 of these 8 patients with contact lenses. Following LASIK (n = 11), there was an induced macrokonia < 2% in 4 patients (36%), persistent microkonia of 3% in 1 patient (9%), and no change in image size in 6 (55%) patients. Following ICL implantation (n = 9), there was a perceived macrokonia of 2% in 4 patients (44%), disappearance of microkonia in 1 patient (11%) and no change in 4 patients (44%).

CONCLUSIONS: Differences in BCVA, stereoacuity, and aniseikonia after correction of anisometropia by glasses, contact lens and surgery are both clinically and statistically insignificant. Retinal or neural adaptation might have a role in correction for differences in image size.