Search

Introduction: Cholecystitis is inflammation of the gall bladder; the presentation of biliary colic is cholelithiasis or choledocholithiasis. Indications for cholecystectomy are cholecystitis (acute/chronic), symptomatic cholelithiasis, and gall bladder masses/polyps. Appendicitis is inflammation of the appendix and the surgical intervention used is appendectomy. Laparoscopic appendectomy is the most feasible and safe procedure for the treatment of acute appendicitis and complicated appendicitis. Classical open surgeries usually land up in large incisions and associated postoperative effects unlike Laparoscopy. There is no significant difference in the overall postoperative complications, pulmonary complications, and postoperative ileus. Aims and Objectives: 1. To evaluate the patients' preference between laparoscopy over classical open surgery. 2. To assess what reasons make them choose laparoscopy. Results: There is 100% awareness about the disease, and people are completely informed about the need for operation. Less duration of surgery influenced people in a varied manner with 36.6% of YES and 68.3% answered NO option, which means duration of surgery is not a leading factor for choosing laparoscopy. Faster recovery responses are 58.3% of YES and 41.6% of NO, indicating faster recovery is one of the deciding factors. Conclusion and Summary: Patients are following laparoscopy mainly due to their clinicians' suggestion, but when they are posed leading questions about their satisfaction and overall experience, the result is that they are toward laparoscopy due to a quick return to normal activities. Laparoscopy is recommended because it results in a shorter postoperative hospital stay and lower costs. Overall knowledge about laparoscopy is gradually increasing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the surgical department, a breast lump is a frequent complaint. Correct diagnosis helps avoid unnecessary operations, and invasive treatments and to treat malignant lesions at the first sign of the disease. Aim: To compare the efficacy of clinical and radiological diagnostic modalities with histopathological examination to create a roadmap for the treatment of breast diseases. Methods: A prospective comprehensive study was conducted on 50 women presenting with breast complaints admitted to a tertiary care hospitals, over a period of 2 years. Results: All patients were >30 years of age with 52% in the 5th decade. Lumps and pain were the major presenting complaints. 76% of the patients had benign while 24% of patients had malignant features on ultrasonography. On histopathology, 62% of patients had benign lesions and 38% had malignant lesions. Mammography was 86.67% sensitive, and 92% specific in comparison with histopathology with PPV of 86% and NPV of 92%. On comparison of ultrasonography with histopathology, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 66.67%, 100%, 100%, and 83%. FNAC was 86.67% sensitive and 100% specific with a PPV of 100% and NPV of 92%. Conclusion: Breast cancer is a clinical diagnosis with a potential diagnostic error. Mammography and FNAC, offer higher PPV but lower sensitivity and specificity. When the diagnoses are combined for triple assessment, a conclusive diagnosis can be made. Clinical examination and FNAC alone may be sufficient in patients with distinct lumps to rule out cancer and is cost-effective by skipping mammography and ultrasound may be used instead. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hands are a major route for cross-transmission of microorganisms and health care-associated infections [HCAI], and are considered a crucial step in preventing HCAI. Hand hygiene is being a relatively simple procedure, compliance with hand hygiene is reduced among health care providers. When healthcare workers have their own awareness of the importance of hand hygiene, it yields twice the result with half the effort in infection control. The World Health Organization guidelines on hand hygiene in health care indicate the direct observation method to measure compliance with hand hygiene as the gold standard and most reliable method of measurement. Aims: To evaluate the knowledge and current practice about hand hygiene that exists among medical students to prevent associated infections. Methods: Cross-sectional study was done to evaluate knowledge and practice of hand hygiene among medical students using the WHO hand hygiene questionnaire after taking clearance from Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC). A sample size of 100 undergraduate medical students, 20 from each year selected using a stratified random sampling method. They were assessed using the WHO-HAND HYGIENE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HEALTH CARE WORKERS with 10 questions. Based on the scores they were divided into 3 groups, Good >75%, Moderate = 50-74%, and poor <50%. Results: Among 100 medical students, 60% of participants had a moderate level of knowledge regarding hand hygiene, 34% of participants had good knowledge, and 6% had a poor level of knowledge. Conclusion: There is a need to conduct hand hygiene training programs to address the gaps in knowledge and for proper hand hygiene practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]