Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Results | Incident report data were available for the years 2010 to 2017. A total of 464 injuries were recorded by University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center residents. Of these 464 injuries, 19 were incurred by dermatology residents, 122 were incurred by nondermatology medical residents, 322 were incurred by nondermatology surgical residents, and 1 was excluded from the comparative analysis owing to our inability to determine the relevant residency department. Analytical results are illustrated in Figure 1 and Figure 2.Statistically significant findings included the increased mean (95% CI) proportion of suture-needle injuries among dermatology compared with nondermatology specialties (63.2% [95% CI, 41.5%-84.9%] vs 40.1% [95% CI, 36.0%-44.5%]; P = .045) and compared with nondermatology medical specialties (63.2% [95% CI, 41.5%-84.9%] vs 21.3% [95% CI, 14.0%-28.6%]; P ≤ .001), as well as the decreased proportion of hollow-needle and bladed instrument injuries among dermatology compared with nondermatology medical specialties (hollow needles, 15.8% [95% CI, 0.0%-32.2%] vs 39.3% [95% CI, 30.6%-48.0%]; P = .047; and bladed instruments, 5.3% [95% CI, 0.0%-15.3%] vs 32.0% [95% CI, 23.7%-40.3%] P = .02). No significant differences were seen for proportion of electrical instrument injuries or contextual factors leading to injury (eg, recapping needles).Discussion | Further research is necessary to confirm the external validity of this single-institution study. In addition, the data source for this study, optional incident reports, represents a potential weakness of nonresponse and voluntary response bias. Because records were deidentified prior to analysis, confounding factors, such as residents with repeated injuries, could not be evaluated.Previous studies have suggested that resident physicians, and particularly dermatology residents, may be at increased risk of injuries from sharps. 2,4,5 Our study represents the largest nonsurvey-based analysis of injuries from sharps among residents to date, to our knowledge. We demonstrated that dermatology residents, in comparison with residents of other medical specialties, incur a higher proportion of injuries involving suture needles and a lower proportion of injuries involving bladed instruments or hollow needles. This finding provides nonsurvey-based support for the recommendation of future research on injuries from sharps and education being targeted specifically toward prevention of sutureneedle injuries.
Results | Incident report data were available for the years 2010 to 2017. A total of 464 injuries were recorded by University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center residents. Of these 464 injuries, 19 were incurred by dermatology residents, 122 were incurred by nondermatology medical residents, 322 were incurred by nondermatology surgical residents, and 1 was excluded from the comparative analysis owing to our inability to determine the relevant residency department. Analytical results are illustrated in Figure 1 and Figure 2.Statistically significant findings included the increased mean (95% CI) proportion of suture-needle injuries among dermatology compared with nondermatology specialties (63.2% [95% CI, 41.5%-84.9%] vs 40.1% [95% CI, 36.0%-44.5%]; P = .045) and compared with nondermatology medical specialties (63.2% [95% CI, 41.5%-84.9%] vs 21.3% [95% CI, 14.0%-28.6%]; P ≤ .001), as well as the decreased proportion of hollow-needle and bladed instrument injuries among dermatology compared with nondermatology medical specialties (hollow needles, 15.8% [95% CI, 0.0%-32.2%] vs 39.3% [95% CI, 30.6%-48.0%]; P = .047; and bladed instruments, 5.3% [95% CI, 0.0%-15.3%] vs 32.0% [95% CI, 23.7%-40.3%] P = .02). No significant differences were seen for proportion of electrical instrument injuries or contextual factors leading to injury (eg, recapping needles).Discussion | Further research is necessary to confirm the external validity of this single-institution study. In addition, the data source for this study, optional incident reports, represents a potential weakness of nonresponse and voluntary response bias. Because records were deidentified prior to analysis, confounding factors, such as residents with repeated injuries, could not be evaluated.Previous studies have suggested that resident physicians, and particularly dermatology residents, may be at increased risk of injuries from sharps. 2,4,5 Our study represents the largest nonsurvey-based analysis of injuries from sharps among residents to date, to our knowledge. We demonstrated that dermatology residents, in comparison with residents of other medical specialties, incur a higher proportion of injuries involving suture needles and a lower proportion of injuries involving bladed instruments or hollow needles. This finding provides nonsurvey-based support for the recommendation of future research on injuries from sharps and education being targeted specifically toward prevention of sutureneedle injuries.
Results | Incident report data were available for the years 2010 to 2017. A total of 464 injuries were recorded by University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center residents. Of these 464 injuries, 19 were incurred by dermatology residents, 122 were incurred by nondermatology medical residents, 322 were incurred by nondermatology surgical residents, and 1 was excluded from the comparative analysis owing to our inability to determine the relevant residency department. Analytical results are illustrated in Figure 1 and Figure 2.Statistically significant findings included the increased mean (95% CI) proportion of suture-needle injuries among dermatology compared with nondermatology specialties (63.2% [95% CI, 41.5%-84.9%] vs 40.1% [95% CI, 36.0%-44.5%]; P = .045) and compared with nondermatology medical specialties (63.2% [95% CI, 41.5%-84.9%] vs 21.3% [95% CI, 14.0%-28.6%]; P ≤ .001), as well as the decreased proportion of hollow-needle and bladed instrument injuries among dermatology compared with nondermatology medical specialties (hollow needles, 15.8% [95% CI, 0.0%-32.2%] vs 39.3% [95% CI, 30.6%-48.0%]; P = .047; and bladed instruments, 5.3% [95% CI, 0.0%-15.3%] vs 32.0% [95% CI, 23.7%-40.3%] P = .02). No significant differences were seen for proportion of electrical instrument injuries or contextual factors leading to injury (eg, recapping needles).Discussion | Further research is necessary to confirm the external validity of this single-institution study. In addition, the data source for this study, optional incident reports, represents a potential weakness of nonresponse and voluntary response bias. Because records were deidentified prior to analysis, confounding factors, such as residents with repeated injuries, could not be evaluated.Previous studies have suggested that resident physicians, and particularly dermatology residents, may be at increased risk of injuries from sharps. 2,4,5 Our study represents the largest nonsurvey-based analysis of injuries from sharps among residents to date, to our knowledge. We demonstrated that dermatology residents, in comparison with residents of other medical specialties, incur a higher proportion of injuries involving suture needles and a lower proportion of injuries involving bladed instruments or hollow needles. This finding provides nonsurvey-based support for the recommendation of future research on injuries from sharps and education being targeted specifically toward prevention of sutureneedle injuries.
utaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is a malignant neoplasm deriving from epidermal keratinocytes. In the general population, SCC is the second most common form of keratinocyte carcinoma after basal cell basal cell carcinoma, 1,2 and in organ transplant recipients SCC is the most common skin cancer. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Previous studies 12-15 report a risk for nodal metastasis of 1.9% to 4.0% and a risk for diseasespecific death of 1.5% to 2.1% in the general population.The number of solid organ transplants and long-term survival in organ transplant recipients have increased over the 5 decades as a result of progress in both surgical techniques and drug-induced immunosuppression. 16 Notwithstanding the clear benefits of successful allograft transplantation, organ transplant recipients experience important adverse effects from long-term immunosuppressive medication, including a 10-fold increased risk for malignant neoplasms overall. 17,18 In particular, solid organ transplant recipients have a 65-fold to 250-fold higher incidence of SCC compared with those who have not received transplants. After transplantation, 20% to 75% of solid organ transplant recipients are affected by at least 1 SCC within 20 years. 8,19 After a first invasive SCC, multiple subsequent SCCs will develop in 60% to 80% of these patients within 3 years. The risk of SCC increases over time, with the incidence increasing to 40% to 60% at 20 years after transplantation. 20,21 Cutaneous SCC is also associated with a more aggressive behavior and a higher risk of metastasis and death in solid organ transplant recipients than in the general population. 6,7,22 The rate of metastasis in solid organ transplant recipients is reported to be 5% to 8%. 23 IMPORTANCE Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the most frequent malignant neoplasm found in solid organ transplant recipients and is associated with a more aggressive disease course and higher risk of metastasis and death than in the general population.OBJECTIVES To report the clinicopathologic features of and identify factors associated with aggressive SCC in solid organ transplant recipients.METHODS This retrospective multicentric case series included 51 patients who underwent solid organ transplantation and were found to have aggressive SCC, defined by nodal or distant metastasis or death by local progression of primary SCC. Standard questionnaires were completed by the researchers between
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
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.