Search

ABSTRACT Objective: to compare the use of 0.5% alcoholic chlorhexidine and 70% alcohol in skin antisepsis for neuraxial blocks. Method: this is a non-inferiority randomized clinical trial, with two parallel arms. Seventy patients who were candidates for neuraxial block were randomly allocated to group A (n = 35), in whom antisepsis was performed with 0.5% alcoholic chlorhexidine, or to group B (n = 35), in whom we used 70% hydrated ethyl alcohol. Swabs were harvested for culture at three times: before antisepsis, two minutes after application of the antiseptic, and immediately after puncture. The samples were sown in three culture media and the number of colony forming units (CFU) per cm² was counted. Results: there was no difference between the groups regarding age, sex, body mass index, time to perform the block or type of block. There were no differences between groups in the CFU/cm² counts before antisepsis. There was less bacterial growth in group B two minutes after application of the antiseptic (p = 0.048), but there was no difference between the groups regarding the number of CFU/cm² at the end of the puncture. Conclusion: 70% alcohol was more effective in reducing the number of CFU/cm² after two minutes, and there was no difference between the two groups regarding skin colonization at the end of the procedure. These results suggest that 70% alcohol may be an option for skin antisepsis before neuraxial blocks. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02833376.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a auto-estima de pacientes com carcinomas de pele da face e do pescoço. MÉTODOS: Foram estudados 100 pacientes, com idades entre 30 e 90 anos (mediana = 55 anos), sendo 44 eram do gênero masculino e 56 do gênero feminino. O Grupo Estudo foi composto por 50 pacientes portadores de carcinomas de pele na face e no pescoço, com tamanho igual ou maior a 10 mm no seu maior eixo e com diagnóstico confirmado por biópsia prévia. O Grupo Controle consistiu de 50 indivíduos da população geral. Para avaliação da auto-estima, utilizou-se a Escala de Auto-estima de Rosenberg / UNIFESP-EPM. A análise estatística utilizou com o teste de Mann-Whitney e a Análise de Variância de Kruskal Wallis. RESULTADOS: Os pacientes portadores de câncer de pele e os da população geral não apresentaram diferenças significantes em relação à idade (p=0,331), gênero e escolaridade. O tamanho médio do tumor foi 20,9 + 2 mm. Os pacientes com câncer de pele apresentaram auto-estima significantemente mais baixa, com escore médio de 6,84 e 3,90 para o Grupo Controle (p=0,002). CONCLUSÃO: Os pacientes com câncer de pele na face e no pescoço apresentaram auto-estima menor do que os pacientes sem câncer.

OBJETIVO: analisar os custos do tratamento cirúrgico de carcinomas cutâneos, realizado em serviço de Cirurgia Plástica de hospital universitário, em pacientes do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). MÉTODOS:setenta e um pacientes foram incluídos e registrados seus dados sociodemográficos e da operação. Para análise de custos diretos foi considerado o período de internação do paciente, incluindo custos materiais e humanos. RESULTADOS: o custo material médio por procedimento foi R$.324,70, e o valor médio da taxa de serviço hospitalar, segundo a tabela do SUS, foi R$.193,66. Com isso, obteve-se um custo total médio de R$.518,36 por procedimento. Entretanto, o valor médio repassado pelo SUS ao hospital por procedimento foi R$.429,19. CONCLUSÃO: o tratamento cirúrgico dos carcinomas cutâneos gerou para o hospital, um déficit médio de R$.89,16 reais por procedimento.

Objective: To develop a proposal for metrics for protocols and other technical products to be applied in assessing the Postgraduate Programs of Medicine III - Capes. Methods: The 2013 area documents of all the 48 Capes areas were read. From the analysis of the criteria used by the areas at the 2013's Triennal Assessment, a proposal for metrics for protocols and other technical products was developed to be applied in assessing the Postgraduate Programs of Medicine III. This proposal was based on the criteria of Biological Sciences I and Interdisciplinary areas. Results: Only seven areas have described a scoring system for technical products. The products considered and the scoring varied widely. Due to the wide range of different technical products which could be considered relevant, and that would not be punctuated if they were not previously specified, it was developed, for the Medicine III, a proposal for metrics in which five specific criteria to be analyzed: Demand, Relevance/Impact, Scope, Complexity and Adherence to the Program. Based on these criteria, each product can receive 10 to 100 points. Conclusion: This proposal can be applied to the item Intellectual Production of the evaluation form, in subsection "Technical production, patents and other relevant production". The program will be scored as Very Good when it reaches mean ≥150 points/permanent professor/quadrennium; Good, mean between 100 and 149 points; Regular, mean between 60 and 99 points; Weak mean between 30 and 59 points; Insufficient, up to 29 points/permanent professor/quadrennium.

Objective: To develop a proposal for metrics for patents to be applied in assessing the postgraduate programs of Medicine III - Capes. Methods: From the reading and analysis of the 2013 area documents of all the 48 areas of Capes, a proposal for metrics for patents was developed to be applied in Medicine III programs. Results: Except for the areas Biotechnology, Food Science, Biological Sciences III, Physical Education, Engineering I, III and IV and Interdisciplinary, most areas do not adopt a scoring system for patents. The proposal developed was based on the criteria of Biotechnology, with adaptations. In general, it will be valued, in ascending order, the deposit, the granting and licensing/production. It will also be assigned higher scores to patents registered abroad and whenever there is a participation of students. Conclusion: This proposal can be applied to the item Intellectual Production of the evaluation form, in subsection Technical Production/Patents. The percentage of 10% for academic programs and 40% for Masters Professionals should be maintained. The program will be scored as Very Good when it reaches 400 points or over; Good, between 200 and 399 points; Regular, between 71 and 199 points; Weak up to 70 points; Insufficient, no punctuation.