Objective To explore the application effect of trauma intelligent first aid platform in the treatment of severe trauma patients. Methods 160 patients with severe trauma admitted to Department of Emergency Medicine,the Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University from January to December 2023 were selected as research objects. A total of 80 patients treated in the traditional trauma first aid mode from January to June 2023 were included in control group,and 80 patients treated in the trauma intelligent first aid platform from July to December 2023 were included in observation group. The effectiveness,success rate of rescue and information warning rate of two groups were compared. Results Arrival time of multidisciplinary trauma treatment team,time of completing CT examination,time of staying in rescue room,time of waiting for blood transfusion and time of hospitalization in observation group were shorter than those in control group (P<0.05). The success rate of rescue in observation group was higher than that in control group (P<0.05). Conclusion The intelligent trauma first aid platform can effectively improve the first aid efficiency and success rate of rescue with severe trauma patients.

Objective To explore the application effect of trauma intelligent first aid platform in the treatment of severe trauma patients. Methods 160 patients with severe trauma admitted to Department of Emergency Medicine,the Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University from January to December 2023 were selected as research objects. A total of 80 patients treated in the traditional trauma first aid mode from January to June 2023 were included in control group,and 80 patients treated in the trauma intelligent first aid platform from July to December 2023 were included in observation group. The effectiveness,success rate of rescue and information warning rate of two groups were compared. Results Arrival time of multidisciplinary trauma treatment team,time of completing CT examination,time of staying in rescue room,time of waiting for blood transfusion and time of hospitalization in observation group were shorter than those in control group (P<0.05). The success rate of rescue in observation group was higher than that in control group (P<0.05). Conclusion The intelligent trauma first aid platform can effectively improve the first aid efficiency and success rate of rescue with severe trauma patients.

Objective To understand the various HPV types and the factors influencing their distribution among women with normal cervical cytology in the Shanghai area, to provide basic data for cervical cancer prevention and vaccine use.Methods A questionnaire-based survey was conducted among 3 372 married women in the Shanghai area. A PCR reverse dot blot (PCR-RDB) method was adopted for HPV genotyping of cervical exfoliated cell samples from 3 206 women. Odds ratio (OR) for HPV infection were analyzed using logistic regression. Results Of the 3 206 women investigated, 669 (20.87%) were positive for HPV infection. The highest incidence of HPV infections was seen in the age groups of 55-59 years, 50-54 years and 45-49 years, with the rates of positive detection being 27.67%, 21.65%, and 21.55%, respectively. While 70.4% of the positive cases had a single infection, 29.6% showed multiple infections. In cases with multiple infections, double infection was predominant (20.63%). The top five high-risk gene types were HPV52(3.65%),HPV53(2.71%),HPV51(2.03%),HPV58(1.87%),and HPV16 (1.40%). The top three low-risk gene types were HPV81 (2.03%), HPV42 (1.43%), and HPV55 (1.31%). Among the women with HPV infections,there were 483 having medium-high-risk HPV infection.There were significant differences in the age,the age at first sexual activity,sexual activities per week,education,and alcohol consumption between HPV positive and HPV negative patients. Age stratification showed that the infection rates in the 55-59 years old group were significantly higher than that in the other age groups(χ2=15.349, P=0.000). Both single factor and multivariate non-conditional logistic regression analyses showed that higher education and the start of sexual activity at a later age were protective factors for medium-high-risk HPV infection,with regression coefficients of-0.165 and-0.08,respectively (P<0.01) in the multivariate analysis. The risk factors included age between 55- 59 years, menstrual status (menopause), sexual activity (≥3 times per week) and alcohol consumption. High-risk HPV infections also had the same risk factors,and the odds ratios were 1.558,1.275,and 1.678,respectively(P<0.01).However, 55-59 years of age and alcohol consumption are independent risk factors for medium-high risk HPV infection. Conclusions High-risk HPV in women of Shanghai is commonly caused by HPV52, HPV53, HPV51,HPV58,and HPV16.The high-risk group includes women who are 55-59 years old.While drinking is an independent risk factor for medium-high risk HPV infection, a moderate sex life and delayed age at first sex can reduce the risk of high-risk HPV infections.

OBJECTIVETo investigate the guidance role of preoperative nutritional risk screening in perioperative nutrition support for colorectal cancer patients in order to provide evidence for the rational clinical application of nutrition support.

METHODSNutritional risk screening was carried out in 290 hospitalized colorectal cancer patients from The Fourth People's Hospital of Wuxi City, Tongji Hospital of Tongji University and The Second Hospital of Soochow University with the nutritional risk screening(NSR) 2002 score summary table. Postoperative bowel function recovery and associated nutritional indices were compared between patients who received preoperative nutrition support according to the risk screening results and those who did not.

RESULTSAmong 110 patients at nutritional risk, 65 received perioperative nutrition support and had faster recovery of intestinal function [time to first flatus (2.3±0.5) d vs. (3.3±0.5) d, time to first defecation (3.5±0.5) d vs. (4.6±0.6) d, semi-fluid intake (10.1±1.2) d vs. (12.4±2.2) d], shorter postoperative stay [(15.7±1.1) d vs. (18.8±1.4) d], and higher albumin, prealbumin and transferrin [(33.2±4.5) g/L vs. (26.0±4.0) g/L, (0.28±0.05) g/L vs. (0.16±0.04) g/L, (1.92±0.33) g/L vs. (1.75±0.45) g/L] at 7-day postoperatively (all P<0.05) as compared to those without perioperative nutrition support(n=45). While among 180 cases without nutritional risk, there were no significant differences in the above indices between patients who received preoperative nutrition support and those who did not (all P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONIt is important to evaluate the nutritional risk in hospitalized patients with colorectal cancer, and to carry out nutrition support actively for those at nutritional risk.

Colorectal Neoplasms ; therapy ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Nutrition Assessment ; Nutritional Support ; Perioperative Care ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Assessment

Objective To investigate the guidance role of preoperative nutritional risk screening in perioperative nutrition support for colorectal cancer patients in order to provide evidence for the rational clinical application of nutrition support. Methods Nutritional risk screening was carried out in 290 hospitalized colorectal cancer patients from The Fourth People′s Hospital of Wuxi City, Tongji Hospital of Tongji University and The Second Hospital of Soochow University with the nutritional risk screening (NSR) 2002 score summary table. Postoperative bowel function recovery and associated nutritional indices were compared between patients who received preoperative nutrition support according to the risk screening results and those who did not. Results Among 110 patients at nutritional risk, 65 received perioperative nutrition support and had faster recovery of intestinal function [time to first flatus (2.3 ±0.5) d vs. (3.3 ± 0.5) d, time to first defecation (3.5 ±0.5) d vs. (4.6 ±0.6) d, semi-fluid intake (10.1 ±1.2) d vs. (12.4 ± 2.2) d], shorter postoperative stay [(15.7±1.1) d vs. (18.8±1.4) d], and higher albumin, prealbumin and transferrin [(33.2±4.5) g/L vs. (26.0±4.0) g/L, (0.28±0.05) g/L vs. (0.16±0.04) g/L, (1.92±0.33) g/L vs. (1.75±0.45) g/L] at 7-day postoperatively (all P<0.05) as compared to those without perioperative nutrition support (n=45). While among 180 cases without nutritional risk, there were no significant differences in the above indices between patients who received preoperative nutrition support and those who did not (all P>0.05). Conclusion It is important to evaluate the nutritional risk in hospitalized patients with colorectal cancer , and to carry out nutrition support actively for those at nutritional risk.

Objective To investigate the guidance role of preoperative nutritional risk screening in perioperative nutrition support for colorectal cancer patients in order to provide evidence for the rational clinical application of nutrition support. Methods Nutritional risk screening was carried out in 290 hospitalized colorectal cancer patients from The Fourth People′s Hospital of Wuxi City, Tongji Hospital of Tongji University and The Second Hospital of Soochow University with the nutritional risk screening (NSR) 2002 score summary table. Postoperative bowel function recovery and associated nutritional indices were compared between patients who received preoperative nutrition support according to the risk screening results and those who did not. Results Among 110 patients at nutritional risk, 65 received perioperative nutrition support and had faster recovery of intestinal function [time to first flatus (2.3 ±0.5) d vs. (3.3 ± 0.5) d, time to first defecation (3.5 ±0.5) d vs. (4.6 ±0.6) d, semi-fluid intake (10.1 ±1.2) d vs. (12.4 ± 2.2) d], shorter postoperative stay [(15.7±1.1) d vs. (18.8±1.4) d], and higher albumin, prealbumin and transferrin [(33.2±4.5) g/L vs. (26.0±4.0) g/L, (0.28±0.05) g/L vs. (0.16±0.04) g/L, (1.92±0.33) g/L vs. (1.75±0.45) g/L] at 7-day postoperatively (all P<0.05) as compared to those without perioperative nutrition support (n=45). While among 180 cases without nutritional risk, there were no significant differences in the above indices between patients who received preoperative nutrition support and those who did not (all P>0.05). Conclusion It is important to evaluate the nutritional risk in hospitalized patients with colorectal cancer , and to carry out nutrition support actively for those at nutritional risk.