Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37654830›Full record

ArticleBioinformation2022

Clinical and bacteriological profile of abdominal surgical site infections in an Indian Hospital.

Kumar Ratnesh, Somen Jha, Anamica Arya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kumar RatneshPG Department of General Surgery, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College and Hospital, Bhagalpur, Bihar, India.
Somen JhaPG Department of General Surgery, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College and Hospital, Bhagalpur, Bihar, India.
Anamica AryaPG Department of General Surgery, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College and Hospital, Bhagalpur, Bihar, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study was carried out to assess the clinical and bacterial profiles of abdominal surgery site infections in a tertiary care hospital.Samples recovered from infected wounds at abdominal surgery sites were processed using highly advanced microbiological procedures. To process these samples, the most recently accepted standard CLSI guidelines were used. Antimicrobial vulnerability was investigated using a modified Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method.97 samples were collected from 83 patients who had proven evidence of infections at abdominal surgery sites. It was found that 97.5% of the total samples had evidence of significant growth of bacteria and bacterial isolates obtained were 88 in number. Staphylococcus aureus was the most often isolated bacterium, accounting for 51.52% of total samples. The second most prevalent germ isolated was Escherichia coli, which accounted for 24.13% of total samples. It was concluded that the high prevalence of infections at the surgical sites of abdomen in our study highlights the importance of providing high-quality surgical care that considers the features of the host, environment, and microorganisms before performing any surgery.

Indexed as

Abdomenbacterial profileSurgical Site Infection

Identifiers

PMID37654830
PMCPMC10465769

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.