47

Objectives: Intoxication with pesticides is a well-known public health problem. We aimed to describe the demographic and toxico-clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with pesticide poisoning. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study was performed in Khorshid Hospital affiliated with Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. All patients with pesticide poisoning (insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, rodenticides, and acaricides) were evaluated. The patients’ demographic, toxicological, clinical, and laboratory findings from March 2016 until March 2021 were collected and analyzed. Results: During the study period, 25,659 patients with acute poisoning were admitted, of which, 1567 (6.1% of the total poisoning) with pesticide poisoning were included. The mean ± SD age of the patients was 31.34 ± 13.7 years and 55.3% were men (male/female ratio = 1.23). In approximately 75% of the patients, poisoning occurred by suicidal attempts, while in 14.3% ( n = 224), it was accidental. Insecticides caused about 51.30% of the poisonings. However, rodenticides were most commonly used in completed suicide attempts (79.9%). The frequency of previously attempted suicide, and self-harming was different among the patients with respect to the type of pesticide poisoning ( p < 0.05). Previous suicidal attempts (35.3%) and self-harming (17.3%) were reported more in patients poisoned with the combination of pesticides. Half of the patients were employed. Nausea and vomiting (56.7%, n = 889) were the most common clinical manifestations; 8.3% ( n = 130) of the patients died, 64 of whom had rodenticide poisoning. Conclusion: The prevalence of pesticide poisoning was relatively low; most were insecticide poisoning. Poisoning occurred most through attempted suicide. Rodenticides and herbicides had higher mortality rates than other pesticides. Patients with previously attempted suicide and self-harming behavior may use a combination of pesticides.

Background: The aim of the study is to explore the risk factors of mortality for hospitalized patients in three designated hospitals in Isfahan province. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted on all positive coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 patients admitted to Khorshid, Isabn Maryam, and Amin hospitals in Isfahan province. The demographic, clinical, laboratory, and outcome data of patients who were died or discharged from February 24, 2020, to April 18, 2020, were extracted from patient's medical records. Results: Overall 1044 COVID-19 patients were included in this analysis. Based on the findings of this study, older age (≥65 years) (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13–3.76), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) history (aHR: 2.52; 95% CI: 1.09–5.83), white blood cell (WBC) counts more than 10 × 10^3/L (aHR: 3.05; 95% CI: 1.42–6.55), Hb level <13 gr/L (aHR: 2.82; 95% CI: 1.34–5.93), bilateral pulmonary infiltrates (aHR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.12–3.64) at admission, development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (aHR: 1.87; 95% CI: 1.01–3.47), and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (aHR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.04–4.18) during hospitalization were risk factors for in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions: Multiple factors were found related to the severity and death among COVID-19 patients. We were found that older age (≥65 years) with COPD history, high level of WBC, low level of Hb (<13 g/L), bilateral pulmonary infiltrates at admission, development of ARDS, and ICU admission during hospitalization were identified as risk factors of death among COVID-19 patients. More related studies are needed in the future.

Methodological biases are common in observational studies evaluating treatment effectiveness. The objective of this study is to emulate a target trial in a competing risks setting using hospital-based observational data. We extend established methodology accounting for immortal time bias and time-fixed confounding biases to a setting where no survival information beyond hospital discharge is available: a condition common to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) research data. This exemplary study includes a cohort of 618 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We describe methodological opportunities and challenges that cannot be overcome applying traditional statistical methods. We demonstrate the practical implementation of this trial emulation approach via clone–censor–weight techniques. We undertake a competing risk analysis, reporting the cause-specific cumulative hazards and cumulative incidence probabilities. Our analysis demonstrates that a target trial emulation framework can be extended to account for competing risks in COVID-19 hospital studies. In our analysis, we avoid immortal time bias, time-fixed confounding bias, and competing risks bias simultaneously. Choosing the length of the grace period is justified from a clinical perspective and has an important advantage in ensuring reliable results. This extended trial emulation with the competing risk analysis enables an unbiased estimation of treatment effects, along with the ability to interpret the effectiveness of treatment on all clinically important outcomes.

Background Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health issue. Physicians should play a key role to fight AMR, and medical education is a fundamental issue to combat it. Understanding the knowledge, attitudes and practices of physicians regarding antibiotic prescription and antibiotic resistance is fundamental for controlling the irrational antibiotic use. This study was conducted to assess the knowledge, attitudes and the practices of physicians in Iran with respect to antibiotic resistance and usage. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed from June to October 2021 among physicians at primary care centers and academic hospitals in the region of Isfahan, Iran. A total of 182 physicians were surveyed. Participants were invited to complete a self-reported questionnaire (paper based or online questionnaire). The questions were based on knowledge, attitude, and practice toward antibiotic usage and AMR. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 18 software following the objective of the study. Results Out of 182 study participants, 100, 50 and 32 responders were medical doctors (MD), internist and other specialists, respectively. Regarding the knowledge section of the questionnaire, almost less than 10% of participants declared to know the antibiotics of Iran's antimicrobial stewardship program. Also, the percentage of participants who correctly responded to clinical quizzes was 23% for treatment of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producers, 59.3% about the treatment of severe sepsis, 22% about the intrinsic resistance of Proteus mirabilis and 43.4% for experimental treatment with vancomycin in community-acquired pneumonia. Regarding attitude, most participants (97.2%) were aware of the antimicrobial resistance problem in Iran, and 95.6% agreed that prescribing antimicrobials was not the appropriate in our country. Regarding practice, only 65.9% of participants said that before prescribing antibiotics they use of local and international antimicrobial therapy guidelines and less than 50% of physicians were in contact with a microbiology laboratory. Conclusion This data revealed that our physicians' level of knowledge about AMR and antimicrobial stewardship is poor, so there is the need to increase training on antibiotic resistance and antimicrobial stewardship.