Objective To investigate the application of risk assessment in the control of nosocomial infections in surgical departments of infectious disease hospitals so as to provide references for the regulation of prevention and control measures. Methods Nosocomial infection risks in surgical departments of infectious disease hospitals were identified by the method of brainstorming. Based on risk assessment and planning of American children's national medical center in Washington for epidemic and infectious diseases control, the matrix method was used for risk assessment. The three highest risks were controlled, and then we compared the incidence of nosocomial infections before and after the risk assessment. Results The major risk factors in surgical departments existed in the process of diagnosis and treatment. By matrix scoring, excluding high readiness items, we found that the top three risks were airborne diseases, prevention and nursing of hematogenous infections and air disinfection. Nosocomial infection rate in the surgical departments dropped to 2.03% after carrying out risk assessment and taking correspondent measures (χ2=5.480,P=0.019). Conclusion Evaluation of nosocomial infection risk in surgical departments of infectious disease hospitals can discover major potential risks and reduce the incidence of nosocomial infections, which can provide references for management and control of nosocomial infections.
ObjectiveTo compare and analyze the therapeutic effect of robotic and laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer for obese patients with rectal adenocarcinoma. MethodsThe retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathologic data of 217 obese patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from October 2017 to January 2020 were collected, 104 patients received radical resection of rectal cancer assisted by Da Vinci robotic surgical system and were assigned to the robot group, 113 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted radical resection of rectal cancer and were assigned to the laparoscope group. The perioperative indexes, pathological examination, and postoperative recovery of urogenital function were compared. ResultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups in the gender, age, body mass index, distance from lower edge of tumor to anal edge, tumor diameter, American Association of Anesthesiologists classification, preoperative complications, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level, tumor differentiation, and TNM stage (P>0.05). The operations were successfully completed in all patients and there was no conversion to laparotomy and perioperative death. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the operation time, first exhaust time, first eating liquid food time, first getting out of bed activity time, drainage tube placement time, prophylactic stoma rate, and postoperative complications (P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss and total hospital stay in the robot group were less than those of the laparoscope group (P<0.05). The International Prostate Symptom Score of the robot group was lower than that of the laparoscope group at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation (P<0.05). The International Index of Erectile Function-15 score of male patients and Female Sexual Function Index-19 score of female patients in the robot group were higher than those in the laparoscope group at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation (P<0.05). ConclusionsRobotic surgery is safe and effective in treatment of obese patients with rectal adenocarcinoma. Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery could benefit patients more in protecting postoperative genitourinary function.