Humans are exposed to health-impairing air pollutants, especially children who are more sensitive to cancer-causing toxins. This study described an area of reference for inhalable particulates (PM2.5) by chemical (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) and mutagenic characterization associated with the genetic biomonitoring of children (aged 5-11 years). The area studied was in a small town in Brazil, used as reference in previous studies. Organic matter of PM2.5 (extracted with dichloromethane) was evaluated for mutagenesis in a Salmonella/microsome (microsuspension) assay, in strains measuring frameshift error (TA98, YG1021 and YG1024) and base pair substitution (TA100) of DNA, in the presence and absence of rat liver metabolization fraction (S9). Exposure was studied analyzing a sample of 45 children using comet assay (peripheral blood lymphocytes) and micronucleus (exfoliated buccal mucosa cells). PM2.5 concentration for the period was 9% (25.89-64.71 μg/m3) events above WHO limit value (25 μg/m3). Mutagenesis responses (revertants/m3) varied from negative (spring) to 8.3±0.69 (autumn) (-S9) and 5.4±0.36 (winter) (+S9), in strain TA98, and for TA100, in spring, from negative to 14.8±4.23 (-S9) and 17.5±2.72 (+S9). YG strain results show mononitroarenes and aromatic amines. Mean biomonitoring values were established for MN, 0.3±0.41 (‰) and for other cell types a variation from 0.6±0.73 (‰), nuclear buds to 57.5±24.92 (‰), karyorrhexis. Comet assay means were 23.1±12.44; 7.3±11.66 and 0.9±2.30 for tail length, intensity and moment, respectively. There was no difference for sex and age for the different parameters. A significant difference in confounding factors was observed for passive smoking and MN induction. PAHs and mutagenesis in the air may be related to local vehicular emissions. These results challenge the definition of areas of reference for air pollution associated with human biomonitoring including the region studied.
The study aimed to evaluate the antimicrobial susceptibility of 109 samples of Escherichia coli (E. coli) of environmental origin and to characterize these isolates according to the degree of pathogenicity in vivo, verifying a possible relationship between this variable and susceptibility to the active principles tested. The isolates were subjected to disc diffusion test to 14 antibiotics. From 16.5% to 90% of the samples were sensitive; 1 - 28.5% showed intermediate degree of susceptibility and between 9 to 78% of E. coli analyzed were resistant. The highest resistance percentages were seen in the class of quinolones and tetracyclines (>75%), and for sensitivity in the class of amphenicols (68.8%). By inoculating 1- day - old chicks, the isolates were classified as highly pathogenic (2.7%), intermediate (10.1%), low (42.2%) and apathogenic (45%). It was observed a wide variation in the susceptibility profile of isolates in relation to antimicrobials. It was also found that most of the samples had pathogenic potential (55%), thus being considered as APEC (avian pathogenic E. coli). No relationship between pathogenicity and antimicrobial susceptibility (P≤0.05) was observed.
Diarrheagenic (DEC) and avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC) are associated with intestinal and extra-intestinal infections (ExPEC), respectively. We aimed to analyze the antimicrobial susceptibility, gene encoding virulence factors associated to DEC and APEC, and phylogenetic classification in E. coli isolated from 320 samples of feed and ingredients. Antimicrobial susceptibility was performed using the disk diffusion method and Multiple Antibiotic Resistance (MAR) Index and Multi-Drug Resistance (MDR) were calculated. Phylogenetic classification was performed on samples harboring DEC and/or APEC virulence-associated genes. A total of 110 E. coli strains were isolated in 15% (49/320) of the evaluated inputs (n=13 vegetable meal; n=33 animal meal, n=3 feed). In general, the isolates showed the highest rates of antimicrobial resistance to sulfonamide and cefazolin and 18% (20/110) were multi-drug resistant. MAR index of feed samples was the highest (0.467). Six and five strains had APEC and DEC virulence-associated genes, respectively, and belonging to phylogenetic groups A and B1. These findings point to the need for strict microbiological control during the production process of these foods.
Hand Hygiene (HH) is a simple and essential action in the prevention of infectious diseases. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the levels of adherence, technique, and knowledge about HH by healthcare workers and perform an educational intervention. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis with 20 professionals, for six months. We observed and categorized the HH opportunities, evaluated the performance of the correct technique, determined the degree of HH compliance (Positivity Index proposed by Carter, IPC) and applied a questionnaire about HH. The data contributed to conduct training and discussion about COVID-19, using a didactic model of virus. We observed N = 791 opportunities for HH, but only N = 128 (16.18%) were performed, with the correct technique in 80.47% (N = 103). The categories with the greatest number of opportunities for HH were “after patient care” (N = 238) and “before patient care” (N = 214). However, HH occurred only in N = 76 (31.93%) and N = 28 (13.08%), respectively. Comparing the categories, the highest adherence was "after removing the gloves" (53.19%). The degree of HH compliance in this study is lower than that recommended by the IPC (70%). In the questionnaires, workers affirmed to have taken at least one course about HH throughout their careers; few of them mentioned virus as a microbe present in the hands; “Lack of time” was the major reason to not HH. The educational intervention reinforced the importance of the correct HH technique, stimulated adaptations in the hospital structure and in strategies for coping with the emergence of the pandemic.
Apesar de existirem diferentes metodologias para coleta de microrganismos das mãos, há carência de estudos comparativos. Nesse sentido, objetivamos quantificar potenciais cepas patogênicas nas mãos de profissionais de enfermagem de um hospital público do Sul do Brasil, a partir da avaliação comparativa de métodos de coleta. Para isso, realizamos um estudo transversal, experimental e quali-quantitativo, durante o ano de 2019, sob aprovação do Comitê de Ética e Pesquisa com Seres Humanos. Comprovamos que enxágue com luva é a metodologia indicada para coletas microbiológicas das mãos, já que recuperou 42,19% dos microrganismos, enquanto o swab recuperou 1,91%. A partir disso, realizamos coletas, quantificação e identificação de microrganismos nas mãos de profissionais de enfermagem. Para os microrganismos aeróbios mesófilos a quantificação variou de 5X104 a 4X106 UFC/mão, para os Staphylococcus coagulase positiva variou de 5X104 a 3X106 UFC/mão e para os fungos de 5X104 a 2X106 UFC/mão. Dentre os fungos as leveduras dominaram em 93,73%, sendo identificado, com frequência, o gênero Candida spp. Não foram encontrados coliformes totais e termotolerantes. Staphylococcus aureus estiveram em 90,91% das mãos, sendo realizado Teste de Sensibilidade aos Antibióticos em 25 colônias isoladas, todas testando resistência a pelo menos três classes de antibióticos, mostrando serem multirresistentes. A análise dos dados mostrou que o melhor método de coleta é o de enxágue com luva, pois recupera maior quantidade e diversidade microbiana que o método comparado. Além disso, foi possível observar a importância das mãos como fontes de contaminação cruzada entre pacientes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.