Fishhook Injuries and Antibiotic Prescribing Patterns: A Retrospective Analysis.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Wilderness & Environmental Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-17 DOI:10.1177/10806032241308834
Alan A Lazzara, Jacob S Sinkoff, Robert Thompson, Khader Zahdan, Jonathan Baptiste
{"title":"Fishhook Injuries and Antibiotic Prescribing Patterns: A Retrospective Analysis.","authors":"Alan A Lazzara, Jacob S Sinkoff, Robert Thompson, Khader Zahdan, Jonathan Baptiste","doi":"10.1177/10806032241308834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Fishhook injuries are a common occurrence among anglers. There are no guidelines for prophylactic antibiotic use after fishhook removal. This study analyzed the management of embedded fishhooks, prophylactic antibiotic use, and complication rate at a Michigan county emergency department to observe whether antibiotic use changes patient outcome. Commentary on a freshwater pathogen (<i>Aeromonas hydrophila</i>) is also included.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cases were obtained through a retrospective chart review of patients seen for fishhook injury between 2016 and 2022. We analyzed age, sex, relevant medical history, type of fishhook, site preparation, removal technique, antibiotic use, return visit within 30 days, and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-one patients with fishhooks injuries were identified. Mean age was 48±17 y. Forty-three patients were male (84%), and 8 were female (16%). Hook site varied, with most occurring in the finger/thumb (78.4%) and scalp (5.9%). One case involved the ear cartilage. The most common removal technique was the advance and cut method (52.9%). Four patients had an immunocompromising condition (eg, diabetes). Oral antibiotics were prescribed to 26 patients (51%) on discharge. Prophylactic antibiotic choice varied-cephalexin predominated (61.5%). There were no wound infections or complications in cases where the fishhook was removed during the emergency department encounter (50 of 51). One case involved a delayed presentation, abscess formation, and outpatient hand surgery referral.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this small observational study, antibiotic prophylaxis for freshwater-associated fishhook injury did not change outcome regardless of fishhook location or presence of an immunocompromising condition. Further controlled studies are needed to determine the validity of these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":49360,"journal":{"name":"Wilderness & Environmental Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"10806032241308834"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wilderness & Environmental Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10806032241308834","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Fishhook injuries are a common occurrence among anglers. There are no guidelines for prophylactic antibiotic use after fishhook removal. This study analyzed the management of embedded fishhooks, prophylactic antibiotic use, and complication rate at a Michigan county emergency department to observe whether antibiotic use changes patient outcome. Commentary on a freshwater pathogen (Aeromonas hydrophila) is also included.

Methods: Cases were obtained through a retrospective chart review of patients seen for fishhook injury between 2016 and 2022. We analyzed age, sex, relevant medical history, type of fishhook, site preparation, removal technique, antibiotic use, return visit within 30 days, and complications.

Results: Fifty-one patients with fishhooks injuries were identified. Mean age was 48±17 y. Forty-three patients were male (84%), and 8 were female (16%). Hook site varied, with most occurring in the finger/thumb (78.4%) and scalp (5.9%). One case involved the ear cartilage. The most common removal technique was the advance and cut method (52.9%). Four patients had an immunocompromising condition (eg, diabetes). Oral antibiotics were prescribed to 26 patients (51%) on discharge. Prophylactic antibiotic choice varied-cephalexin predominated (61.5%). There were no wound infections or complications in cases where the fishhook was removed during the emergency department encounter (50 of 51). One case involved a delayed presentation, abscess formation, and outpatient hand surgery referral.

Conclusions: In this small observational study, antibiotic prophylaxis for freshwater-associated fishhook injury did not change outcome regardless of fishhook location or presence of an immunocompromising condition. Further controlled studies are needed to determine the validity of these findings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
鱼钩伤与抗生素处方模式:回顾性分析。
鱼钩伤在垂钓者中很常见。没有关于取下鱼钩后预防性使用抗生素的指导方针。本研究分析了密歇根县急诊科的埋鱼钩管理、预防性抗生素使用和并发症发生率,以观察抗生素使用是否会改变患者的预后。对淡水病原体(嗜水气单胞菌)的评论也包括在内。方法:对2016年至2022年收治的鱼钩伤患者进行回顾性图表分析。我们分析患者的年龄、性别、相关病史、鱼钩类型、部位准备、取出技术、抗生素使用、30天内复诊和并发症。结果:共鉴定出51例鱼钩伤。平均年龄48±17岁,男性43例(84%),女性8例(16%)。钩发部位各不相同,多数发生在手指/拇指(78.4%)和头皮(5.9%)。其中一例涉及耳软骨。最常见的清除方法为推进切法(52.9%)。4例患者有免疫功能低下(如糖尿病)。26例(51%)患者出院时口服抗生素。预防性抗生素的选择多种多样——头孢氨苄占多数(61.5%)。在急诊科就诊时取出鱼钩的病例无伤口感染或并发症(51例中有50例)。一个病例涉及延迟表现,脓肿形成,门诊手手术转诊。结论:在这项小型观察性研究中,对淡水相关鱼钩损伤进行抗生素预防不会改变结果,无论鱼钩位置如何或是否存在免疫损害状况。需要进一步的对照研究来确定这些发现的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
96
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, the official journal of the Wilderness Medical Society, is the leading journal for physicians practicing medicine in austere environments. This quarterly journal features articles on all aspects of wilderness medicine, including high altitude and climbing, cold- and heat-related phenomena, natural environmental disasters, immersion and near-drowning, diving, and barotrauma, hazardous plants/animals/insects/marine animals, animal attacks, search and rescue, ethical and legal issues, aeromedial transport, survival physiology, medicine in remote environments, travel medicine, operational medicine, and wilderness trauma management. It presents original research and clinical reports from scientists and practitioners around the globe. WEM invites submissions from authors who want to take advantage of our established publication''s unique scope, wide readership, and international recognition in the field of wilderness medicine. Its readership is a diverse group of medical and outdoor professionals who choose WEM as their primary wilderness medical resource.
期刊最新文献
Development of Progressively Earth-Independent Medical Operations to Enable NASA Exploration Missions. Suspected Stonefish Envenomation in Reunion Island: 15 Years Later. Attacks on Humans by Neotropical Otters. Case Report of a Traumatic Arthrotomy of the Knee Diagnosed by Ultrasound. Simulated Patient as a Learner: Medical Volunteers Gain Knowledge by Participating in a Wilderness Medicine Training Session.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1