Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 82310

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2011 | Month : November | Volume : 5 | Issue : 7 | Page : 1367 - 1370 Full Version

Surgical Wound Infections: A Prospective Hospital Based Study


Published: November 1, 2011 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2011/.1670
Abhijit Awari, Sunita Nighute, Sachin Deorukhkar

1. M.D. (Microbiology), Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, Kesar SAL Medical College & Research Institute, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. 2. M.D. (Physiology), Assistant Professor, Department of Physiology, Kesar SAL Medical College & Research Institute, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. 3. MSc. (Medical-Microbiology), Assistant Professor, R.M.C Loni, Maharashtra.

Correspondence Address :
Abhijit K. Awari
Doctor’s Quarter No. 9,
Kesar SAL Medical College & Research Institute
Opposite Science City
Bhadaj, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380 060
Phone: 096875 96325.
E-mail: abhijit.awari@yahoo.com

Abstract

A prospective study of 916 surgeries were conducted. All the wounds were examined for the presence of infection in all the 916 surgeries, out of which 840 normal surgeries and seventy six infected surgical wound infections were studied.

The overall infection rate was 8.29%. The surgical infection rate in the wounds following clean surgery (class I) was 3.4%, that in clean contaminated surgeries ( class II) was 7.77%, that in contaminated surgeries (class III) was 16.49% and that in dirty (class IV) surgeries was 24.67%.

In the present study, the rate of infection in the emergency surgeries was not significantly higher than that in the plannedand elective surgeries. The infection rate was seen to be the maximum when the duration of the pre-operative hospitalization was increased. There was a significant increase in the rate of infection as the duration of the surgeries increased. This study shows that the infection rate was higher in patent (9.98%) in whom prophylactic antibiotics were not given.

The infection rate was highest in post appendicectomy wounds and lowest in wounds following hydrocele surgeries.

The commonest isolates from the surgical wound infections was Staphylococcus aureus and E.coli, followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae.

Keywords

Surgery, Morbidity, Emergency, Antibiotics

Introduction
Despite an improved understanding of the patho-physiology and improved methods of prevention and prophylaxis, surgical wound infections remain the most common cause of post operative morbidity and mortality (1).

A surgical wound may get infected by the exogenous bacterial flora which may be present in the environmental air of the operation theatre or by the endogenous flora (2). Surgical wound infection remains one of the most important post-operative complications, accounting for 10 to 20% of the hospital costs. Although total elimination is not possible, a reduction in the infection rate to a minimal level could have significant benefits in terms of both the patient comfort and the medical resources which are used (3). The rate of infection of the surgical wounds is influenced by the duration of the pre-operative hospitalization administration of the prophylactic antibiotics, the duration of the surgery and by the fact as to whether the surgery was emergency or elective, patient factors and environmental factors, both local and general, like age and nutritional status; preexisting illnesses also determine the final outcome. The present study was aimed at obtaining the incidence of the surgical wound infections, determining the antibiotic susceptibility pattern of the micro-organisms which were isolated and determining the factors which were influencing the infection rate.

Material and Methods

The present study was conducted at the Kesar Sal Medical College and Research Centre, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, between September 2010 and May 2011. The study group included all the clean and clean contaminated surgeries and the contaminated and dirty surgeries which were conducted in this hospital duringthat period. The samples were collected from those patients who showed an evidence of surgical wound infections like a serous, sanguinous or purulent discharge, soaked dressings or gaping wounds.

The swabs were collected from the infected wounds and were processed without delay by using standard microbiological methods (4).

The CDC criteria were used for defining the type of the wounds (5). The details of the surgeries, including the preoperative hospitalization, the duration of surgery, whether it was emergency or elective and the antibiotic therapy which was received, were recorded.

The CDC criteria for defining the type of the surgical wounds are as follows: (5)

Class I: Operative wound, clean. Non-traumatic wound in which no inflammation was encountered, no break technique occurred and the respiratory, alimentary and genitourinary tracts were not entered into.

Class II: Operative wound, clean contaminated. done Traumatic wound in which a minor break occurred in the technique or in which the gastrointestinal, genitourinary or the respiratory tracts were entered into without significant spillage. It includes the transaction of the appendix or the cholecystic duct in the absence of acute inflammation and entrance into the genitourinary or the biliary tracts in the absence of infected bile or urine. Hysterectomy was included in this category.

Class III: Operative wound, contaminated. Any fresh trauma wound from a relatively clean source or an operative wound in which there was a major break in the technique, gross spillage from thegastrointestinal tract or entrance into the genitourinary or the billiary tracts in the presence of infected urine or bile. This included the incisions which encountered acute, non purulent inflammation.

Class IV: Operative wound. dirty. Traumatic wound from a dirty source or delay in the treatment, faecal contamination or foreign body or retained devitalized tissue. Also included operative wounds in which an acute bacterial inflammation or a perforated viscus was encountered or in which clean tissue was transected to gain access to a collection of pus.

Results

In all, 916 surgical wounds were studied. The overall infection rate in these wounds was 8.29%. The infection rate in the wounds following dirty class (24.05%) surgeries was significantly higher, followed by the contaminated (16.49), clean contaminated (7.77%) and clean surgeries (3.4%) respectively (Table/Fig 1). The infection rate was directly proportional to the preoperative hospitalization.

The maximum infection rate was observed in patients who were hospitalized for more than 3 days i.e. (19.65%) (Table/Fig 2). The infection rate was less (6.17%) in those who received the antibiotics prophylactically in the form of parenteral administration than in those who did not receive them (9.98%) (Table/Fig 3).

The infection rate in the surgeries of more than 2 hrs duration was highest (10.30%) than in the surgeries of 1 hr duration (Table/Fig 4).

The infection rate was more in the wounds following the emergency surgeries (8.58%) than those following the planned, elective surgeries (7.9%) (Table/Fig 5) but this rise was insignificant. The infection rate was highest in the post-appendicectomy wounds, while it was lowest in the wounds following the surgeries of the hydrocele (Table/Fig 6) Staphylococcus aureus was the commonest isolate which caused the surgical wound infections, followed by E coli, Pseudomonas and Klebsiella (Table/Fig 7). All the isolates were resistant to the commonly used antibiotics (Table/Fig 7).

Discussion

916 Surgeries were studied, which included 840 normal surgeries and 76 infected surgical wound infections. The overall infection rate in the present study was 8.29%. This was in agreement with the overall infection rate which ranged from 2.8% to 20.19% in other studies (6), (7), (8). The rate of infection for clean surgeries (class I) was 3.4%, for the clean contaminated (class II) surgeries, it was 7.77%, for the contaminated (class III) surgeries, it was 16.49% and for the dirty (class IV) surgeries, it was 24.67%. These results were similar to those of Anvikar et al and Olsen Marry et al (6),(7),(8),(9). In the present study, the maximum number of surgeries which were performed was emergency surgeries (57.2%) and the infection rate was found to be 8.58% in the emergency surgeries, which was slightly more than those in the elective surgeries. This was similar to the findings from the studies of Anvikar A.R. 1999 (4.66%) and Jim Ko G Moodley (14.6%) (7).

The pre-operative infection rate in the present study in less than one day was 5.76%, in one to two days, it was 7.14% and in more than 3 days, it was 19.65% i.e. the highest. This was found to correlate with those from the studies of Shrivastava et al (1969) ie. 33% for more than 3 days, of P L Nandi et al (1999) ie. 18% and of Cruise and Foord et al (6),(9),(10),(11) respectively.

In the present study, it was seen that the infection rate was higher (9.98%) in patients in whom the prophylactic antibiotic was not given. This study concludes that the administration of prophylactic antibiotics had an effect on the decrease in the surgical wound infection rate, as the infection rate in patients who were given the prophylactic antibiotics was 6.17%. The findings of this study correlated with the findings of Polk HC, et al (1969) (12), and those of P.L. Nandi et al (1999) (11). The rate of infection in the surgical wounds was directly related to the duration of the surgeries (13). The present study showed that a maximum number of cases were infected when the surgery was prolonged for 2 hrs or more than two hours (10.36%). The infection rate when the duration of the surgery was less than one hr, was 4.73% and when it was less than two hrs, it was 8.57%. Similar findings were reported by S.P. Srivastara et al (10) and Anviker et al (7).

Staphylococcus aureus (21.5%) and E coli (21.5%) were the commonest pathogens which were isolated, followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (17.04%) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (14.77%). Similar findings were recorded by S.P. Srivastava et al and S.V.Bhatia et al (14).

The infection rate was highest in the post-appendicectomy wounds (18.4%). An additional risk factor for wound sepsis following appendicectomy was the inflammatory process in the appendix (15). Various studies have described infection ratesfrom 9.7 to 33.3% in the post appendicectomy wounds (16),(17).

All the isolates were resistant to the commonly used antibiotics.All the isolates were resistant to the commonly used antibiotics.

Conclusion

Surgical wound infections are common and they consume a considerable pattern of the health care finances. Although the infection rate can be reduced by the judicious use of antibiotic prophylaxis, the use of organized systems of wound surveillance and reporting is an effective means to reduce the wound infections.

References

1.
Lauwers S, Smet DEF. Surgical site infections. Acta Clinica Belgica 1998; 53-55.
2.
Culbertson WR, Altemeier WA, Gonzalez LC, Hill EO. Studies on the epidemiology of the postoperative infection of clean operative wounds. Ann Surg 1961; 154: 599-603.
3.
Haley RW, Schaberg DR, crossley KB, Von Allmen SD, McGowan Jr. Extra charges and the prolongation of stay which is attributable to nosocomial infections. A prospective interhospital comparison. AMJ Med 1981; 70:51-58.
4.
Cheesbrough M. Medical laboratory manual for tropical countries Vol. II: Microbiology, 1st ed English language Book society, Cambridge; 1985.
5.
Centre for Disease Control National Nosocomial Infections study quarterly report, first and second quarters 1973; Atlanta, CDC, July 1974.
6.
Cruse PJE, Foord R. A five year prospective study of 23, 649 surgical wounds. Arch Surg 1973; 107: 206-09.
7.
Anvikar A.R., Deshmukh AB, Karyakarate RP, Damle A.S. A one year’s prospective study of 3280 surgical wounds. IJM 1999; 17/ 3: 129- 32.
8.
Olson M, R.N. James T. 10 years of continuous wound infection surveillance. Arch Surg 1990 June; 125.
9.
Peter J.E , Cruise M.B. The Epidemiology of wound infection. A 10 year prospective study of 12939 wounds. Surgical Clinics of North America 1980 Feb; 60/1.
10.
Srivastava S.P, Atal PR, Singh R.P. Studies on hospital infections. Ind J. of Surgery 1969; 612-13.
11.
Nandi PL, Sojundara R, Mak KC, Chan SC, So YP Surgical wound infections. H KMJ 1999; 5: 82-86.
12.
Polk NC, Lopez M J.F, Post operative wound infections. A prospective study of determinant factors and prevention surgery. 1969; 66: 97-103.
13.
Garibaldi RA, Cushing B, Lever T. Risk factors for post operative infections. AMJ Med 1991; 91 suppl 3 13: 1580-1618.
14.
Bhatiya JY, Pandey K, Rodrigues, Mehta A, Joshi VR. Post-operative wound infections in patients undergoing coronary artery by pass graft surgery. A prospective study with the evaluation of the risk factors. IJMM 2003; 21/4: 246-51.
15.
Krukowski ZH, Ivwin ST, Denholms, Matheson NA. Preventing wound infections after apendicectomy. A review Brit J. Surg 1988; 75 : 1023- 33.
16.
Bird CG, Bunch GA, Croft CB et al Topical noxythiolin antisepsis, report of a controlled trial. Brit J Surg 1971; 58: 447-48.
17.
Busittil RW, Pavidson RK, Fine M, Tomkins RK. Effect of prophylactic antibiotics in acute non-perforated appendicitis. A prospective, randomized double blind clinical study. Ann Surg 1981; 194: 502-09.

DOI and Others

JCDR/2011/1670

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com