Objective To evaluate clinical effects of strict control vs. conventional control of blood glucose in perioperative cardiac surgery. Methods Databases including PubMed, EMbase, HighWire, The Cochrane Library, CBM and VIP were searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on strict control vs. conventional control of blood glucose in perioperative cardiac surgery, published from 2000 to 2011. Two reviewers independently screened articles according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed quality of the included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1. Results A total of 8 RCTs involving 2 250 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that compared with the conventional group, the strict control of blood glucose could reduce postoperative short-term mortality (OR=0.52, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.91, P=0.02) and postoperative incidence rate of both atrial fibrillation (OR=0.64, 95%CI 0.43 to 0.96, P=0.03) and incision infection (OR=0.30, 95%CI 0.15 to 0.57, P=0.000 2), and shorten hospital stay (MD=1.75, 95%CI –3.18 to –0.32, Plt;0.02) and time of mechanical ventilation (MD=–0.9, 95%CI –1.43 to –0.38, Plt;0.000 8). Conclusion Current evidence shows that the strict control of blood glucose in perioperative cardiac surgery can reduce postoperative short-term mortality and postoperative incidence rate of both atrial fibrillation and incision infection, shorten hospital stay and time of mechanical ventilation, and have important clinical values and social and economic significance. However, this conclusion has to be proved by more high-quality and large-scale RCTs for the limitation of quantity and quality of the included studies.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the rationality of antibiotics use by analyzing the prescription reviewing results.MethodsThe review data of antibiotic prescriptions in Beijing Hospital was randomly selected from 2016 to 2019, from which unreasonable prescriptions and the antimicrobial agents were analyzed, and the use of antibiotics and unreasonable prescriptions annually were compared.ResultsThe evaluation of rational use of antibiotics involved 79 701 outpatient prescriptions from 2016 to 2019. There were 10 drugs in the top five irrational rates of outpatient antibiotics, primarily cephalosporin and quinolones, accounting for 50% and 30%, respectively. The primarily unreasonable problems were over prescription (common in gastroenterology and dermatology), unsuitable indications (common in otolaryngology), inappropriate usage and dosage (common in urology, dermatology and gastroenterology), and failure to write clinical diagnosis or incomplete clinical diagnosis (common in obstetrics and gynecology and general surgery). During the four years, the proportion of antibiotics prescriptions and the irrational rate decreased annually.ConclusionsThe use of antibiotics in outpatient department of Beijing Hospital has achieved initial results, however, there are still some problems. We should further strengthen the management of antibiotics usage, strengthen training and learning, and increase medical cooperation to promote rational drug use in clinic.