SummaryBackgroundSurgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common infections associated with health care, but its importance as a global health priority is not fully understood. We quantified the burden of SSI after gastrointestinal surgery in countries in all parts of the world.MethodsThis international, prospective, multicentre cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection within 2-week time periods at any health-care facility in any country. Countries with participating centres were stratified into high-income, middle-income, and low-income groups according to the UN's Human Development Index (HDI). Data variables from the GlobalSurg 1 study and other studies that have been found to affect the likelihood of SSI were entered into risk adjustment models. The primary outcome measure was the 30-day SSI incidence (defined by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for superficial and deep incisional SSI). Relationships with explanatory variables were examined using Bayesian multilevel logistic regression models. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02662231.FindingsBetween Jan 4, 2016, and July 31, 2016, 13 265 records were submitted for analysis. 12 539 patients from 343 hospitals in 66 countries were included. 7339 (58·5%) patient were from high-HDI countries (193 hospitals in 30 countries), 3918 (31·2%) patients were from middle-HDI countries (82 hospitals in 18 countries), and 1282 (10·2%) patients were from low-HDI countries (68 hospitals in 18 countries). In total, 1538 (12·3%) patients had SSI within 30 days of surgery. The incidence of SSI varied between countries with high (691 [9·4%] of 7339 patients), middle (549 [14·0%] of 3918 patients), and low (298 [23·2%] of 1282) HDI (p<0·001). The highest SSI incidence in each HDI group was after dirty surgery (102 [17·8%] of 574 patients in high-HDI countries; 74 [31·4%] of 236 patients in middle-HDI countries; 72 [39·8%] of 181 patients in low-HDI countries). Following risk factor adjustment, patients in low-HDI countries were at greatest risk of SSI (adjusted odds ratio 1·60, 95% credible interval 1·05–2·37; p=0·030). 132 (21·6%) of 610 patients with an SSI and a microbiology culture result had an infection that was resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic used. Resistant infections were detected in 49 (16·6%) of 295 patients in high-HDI countries, in 37 (19·8%) of 187 patients in middle-HDI countries, and in 46 (35·9%) of 128 patients in low-HDI countries (p<0·001).InterpretationCountries with a low HDI carry a disproportionately greater burden of SSI than countries with a middle or high HDI and might have higher rates of antibiotic resistance. In view of WHO recommendations on SSI prevention that highlight the absence of high-quality interventional research, urgent, pragmatic, randomised trials based in LMICs are needed to assess measures aiming to reduce this preventable complication.FundingDFID-MRC-Wellcome Trust Joint Global Health Trial Development Grant,...

No abstract

Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV) is the most common virus that causes eye disease. Although around 60% of the world's population are seropositive for HSV antigens, fortunately, it is estimated that only 1% of seropositive individuals develop eye disease. The most common ocular manifestation of HSV is keratitis, while uveitis and retinal necrosis occur in a small number of cases. HSV keratitis is a debilitating disease, for several reasons: pain , photophobia, and vision loss in acute disease, latency of the virus which leads to infection reactivation from various triggers, scarring, and neovascularisation, leading to permanent vision loss with poor visual rehabilitation prospects. The Herpetic Eye Disease Study (HEDS) was a landmark series of randomised controlled trials in the 1990s that set the benchmark for evidence-based treatment guidelines for anterior eye herpetic disease. Since this time, there has been a change in the distribution of seroprevalence of herpes in the community, a simplified diagnostic classification, advances in treatment options, an emergence of new and a better understanding of risk factors, and discoveries in science that show promise for vaccine and novel future treatments. However, many of the principles of the HEDS study remain rightly entrenched in clinical practice. In this article, the HEDS study is revisited 20 years on through the lens of published literature, to determine current best practise and look towards the future.

No abstract

Inadequate antidote stocking is a global problem in hospitals. Insufficient supplies and delays in the administration of antidotes could lead to death and additional potentially negative clinical consequences. Our objective was to determine the availability of antidotes in hospitals listed on the Saudi Ministry of Health website in the Riyadh Province and to evaluate the leading poison in Saudi Arabia. A cross-sectional study was conducted using questionnaires. The questionnaires were distributed to pharmacist directors and emergency room-treating physicians in 17 public hospitals throughout the Riyadh Province. None (0/17) of the pharmacies contained the 24 recommended essential antidotes by the expert consensus guidelines for stocking of antidotes in hospitals. Polyvalent scorpion antivenom, atropine sulphate, calcium gluconate, flumazenil and naloxone hydrochloride were stocked in 94.12% (16/17) of hospitals. 66.67% of patients presented with osmolality, and 55.56% of referral patients with opiates, barbiturates, acetaminophen and salicylate. Our findings have important implications for healthcare institutions and pharmaceutical practices. National practice guidelines are needed to assist pharmacists in selecting appropriate antidotes based on the local pattern of poisoning incidents. Therefore, further study in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia needs to be completed to fully evaluate the availability of antidotes throughout the country.