Farshad Sedaghati Voshme Saraei; Naema Khodadadi-Hassankiadeh; Leila Kouchakinejad‑Eramsadati; Fateme Keihanian; Marieh Hosseinpour
Volume 12, Issue 4 , October 2024, , Pages 193-201
Abstract
Objective: Cycling is a healthy and pleasurable activity, but it can also be hazardous. The risk factors for cycling injury are unknown, considering the cycling infrastructure and cyclists’ behavior in northern Iran. This study aimed to explain the experiences of injured cyclists admitted to Poursina ...
Read More
Objective: Cycling is a healthy and pleasurable activity, but it can also be hazardous. The risk factors for cycling injury are unknown, considering the cycling infrastructure and cyclists’ behavior in northern Iran. This study aimed to explain the experiences of injured cyclists admitted to Poursina Educational and Medical Center, Rasht in 2021, as one of the risk factors associated with cycling.Methods: A content analysis was conducted on the experiences of cyclists over the age of 18 who had one or more injured limbs due to a crash or fall while riding a bicycle. The data were obtained from the registration system of the Guilan Road Trauma Research Center. Potentially eligible participants were contacted by telephone. Twenty people with various characteristics in terms of age, sex, and other features were included in the interview. Results: Cyclists’ experiences with risk factors were divided into 13 categories; including lack of laws, lack of training, poor traffic culture, easy to lose balance, cycling infrastructure, inappropriate roads, darkness, bad weather conditions, unsafe behavior, non-standard bicycle, unsafe protection, intentional injury to female road users, and risk of collision with other road users.Conclusion: The extracted risk factors can be used as the ABC of cycling to novice cyclists. Thus, responsible efforts to regulate, educate, promote, and monitor cycling can encourage people to ride.
Rizwan Khan; Arvind Kumar; Mukesh Kumar; Javed Jameel
Volume 9, Issue 1 , January 2021, , Pages 46-47
Abstract
The current COVID-19 situation has been taking a high toll on the healthcare workers who are at constant risk of exposure to the contagion, especially those who are involved in treating the COVID-19 infected patients. The risk of exposure is further high during the surgical procedures, considering the ...
Read More
The current COVID-19 situation has been taking a high toll on the healthcare workers who are at constant risk of exposure to the contagion, especially those who are involved in treating the COVID-19 infected patients. The risk of exposure is further high during the surgical procedures, considering the aerosol generation and prolonged contact with the patients. Performing orthopedic surgeries in PPEs (personal-protective-equipment) is not an easy task. Besides the cumbersome body coverage of PPE gown and hood, and the N95 masks which result in early fatigue and exhaustion, a constantly frustrating issue is the fogging of eyewear which limits surgeon’s vision and ability to perform fine tasks [1].
Abbas Rasouli; Seyed Mojtaba Hosseini; Mohammad Karim Bahadori; Ramin Ravangard
Volume 6, Issue 2 , April 2018, , Pages 155-161
Abstract
Objective: To prioritize occupational hazards in a Pharmaceutical Company in Iran using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP).Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in a Pharmaceutical Company in Iran in 2017. All employees working in the administrative, production, installations and facilities, ...
Read More
Objective: To prioritize occupational hazards in a Pharmaceutical Company in Iran using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP).Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in a Pharmaceutical Company in Iran in 2017. All employees working in the administrative, production, installations and facilities, and laboratory units were studied using the consensus method (N=n=130 employees). A data collection form was designed for identifying the hazards using the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) method, as well as a pair-wise questionnaire was used for collecting required data in the quantitative phase. The collected data were analyzed using Expert Choice 10.0 and SPSS 23.0.Results: The results showed that among hazards detected in the studied units, the highest and lowest weights and priorities were, respectively, related to "inhalation of toxic gases" (W=0.253) and “being exposed to radiation” (W=0.022) in the laboratory unit, "skin injuries" (W=0.205) and “bending and straightening for a long time” (W= 0.032) in the production unit, "falling down" (W=0.271) and “standing and sitting for a long time “ (W=0.037) in the installations and facilities unit, and "hand joint failure" (W=0.295) and “working in a low-light environment” (W=0.092) in the administrative unit.Conclusion: The results of the present study showed that there were hazards in all of the studied units. These results indicated a high level of hazards in the pharmaceutical company’s units. Due to the increased medication diversification and increased workload for these companies, paying attention to the preventive and corrective measures in order to reduce the risk of emerging hazards is essential.
Seyed Mohammad Hosseininejad; Hamed Amini Ahidashti; Farzad Bozorgi; Iraj Goli Khatir; Seyed Hosein Montazer; Fatemeh Jahanian; Mehran Amooei Khanabbasi
Volume 5, Issue 3 , July 2017, , Pages 165-170
Abstract
Objective: To compare the efficacy of combination therapy with ketorolac and morphine with monotherapy with each in patients with acute renal colic. Methods: This triple-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted during a 6-month period from March to September 2014 in Northern Iran. We included ...
Read More
Objective: To compare the efficacy of combination therapy with ketorolac and morphine with monotherapy with each in patients with acute renal colic. Methods: This triple-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted during a 6-month period from March to September 2014 in Northern Iran. We included 300 patients with clinical diagnosis of acute renal colic and pain score greater than 4 on 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS) score. Patients were randomly assigned to three study groups to receive 0.1 mg/kg morphine in combination with 30 mg ketorolac (n=100), or only 0.1 mg/kg morphine (n=100) or only 30mg ketorolac (n=100). All the patients were evaluated at 0, 20 minute,40 minute later. Our outcomes were pain reduction and need for additive morphine in 20 and 40 minutes. We also recorded and compared the adverse effects between the study groups.Results: There was no significant difference between the study groups. The pain intensity was comparable between three study groups after 20-min of intervention. However, we found that the pain intensity was significantly lower in balanced analgesia group when compared to morphine (3.01±0.98 vs. 3.66±1.02; p=0.012) or ketorolac alone (3.01±0.98 vs. 3.68±0.88; p=0.018). However, those receiving the balanced analgesia, required significantly less rescue analgesia when compared to morphine (16% vs. 20%; p=0.041) or ketorolac (16% vs. 24%; p=0.012) alone. Conclusion: Balanced analgesia with morphine and ketorolac is more effective compared to morphine or ketorolac alone determine by lower pain scores after 40-min of injection and lower need for rescue analgesia.
