Investigation into various risk factors associated with surgical site infection in large animals.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This research comprised four studies aiming to contribute to our knowledge regarding factors associated with an increased risk of developing surgical site infection (SSI) in the large animal clinical setting. \n The first study of this thesis reported the prevalence of MRSA in hospitalized horses in a referral hospital in Atlantic Canada and describes the use of surveillance and whole genome sequencing to follow an outbreak of MRSA in this veterinary teaching hospital. This was the first report of MRSA ST398 t011 in horses in North America and intercontinental spread from Europe to North America via veterinary personnel was likely the cause of the reported MRSA outbreak. This highlights that aside from animal movement, movement of veterinary personnel can pose a risk for transmission of MRSA to horses from one geographical region to another. \n The second study determined the incidence of glove perforation in large animal surgery based on water leak test (WLT) and electroconductivity testing (ECT) and identified risk factors for glove perforation. Glove perforation rates in large animal surgery appear to be comparable to those in human and in small animal studies, and ECT was more sensitive than WLT in detecting glove perforations. Factors that increase the odds of glove perforation included the duration a glove was worn, invasiveness of the procedure, and role of the wearer in the surgical procedure. \n The third study compared the ability of four surgical hand preparation techniques to reduce total aerobic bacterial counts on equine surgeon’s hands. While all four hand preparation techniques evaluated in this study were effective based on the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Tentative Final Monograph (ASTM E-1115), use of a sole alcohol based agent was less effective than chlorhexidine (CHx) containing products providing evidence that use of CHx still has value for preparation of equine surgeon’s hands. However, the use of a brush scrub technique with CHx showed no benefit compared to rub techniques in reducing bacterial counts. \n The last study’s objective was to describe the change of microbiota on human hands during the process of hand antisepsis and surgery, and similarly, the change in microbiota of the horses’ skin over the course of surgical antisepsis and surgery. Preliminary results of this study did not identify significant changes in microbiota composition from before to after antiseptic preparation of both human and equine skin samples. Further sample processing and analysis needs to be carried out before conclusions from this study can be drawn but quantification of bacterial numbers and assessment of viability remain major challenges with next generation sequencing approaches and may warrant combined approaches of culture-dependent and independent methodologies for a more complete assessment of the effect of antiseptic methods and their efficacy. \n These studies demonstrated that investigation of factors that influence SSI in large animal surgery require a comprehensive approach and are partly limited by low surgical case load and the multifactorial nature of the etiology of SSI. This work did fill gaps in knowledge about factors that had been previously described in other species to influence the rate of SSI.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».