Pregled bolničkih infekcija i najčešćih uzročnika u multidisciplinarnoj jedinici za intenzivno liječenje u državi sa srednjim do visokim dohotkom

Uvod: Cilj je ovog istraživanja utvrditi pojavnost bolničkih infekcija u multidisciplinarnoj jedinici za intenzivno liječenje (JIL) Sveučilišne kliničke bolnice Mostar i ustanoviti koji su patogeni mikroorganizmi najčešći uzročnici istih. Ispitanici i metode: U ovu retrospektivnu studiju uključeni su pacijenti hospitalizirani u JIL-u duže od 48 sati, u razdoblju od 1.1.2017. do 31.12.2017. godine. Za analizu su korišteni uzorci hemokultura, urinokultura i bronhoaspirata koji su uzimani 48 sata nakon prijema bolesnika u JIL. Svi su podaci preuzeti iz informacijskog bolničkog sustava, a za analizu su korištene deskriptivne statističke metode. Rezultati: Od ukupno 644 bolesnika primljenih u JIL u datom razdoblju, 277 je odgovaralo postavljenim kriterijima, od kojih je pak 70 (25,27%) sa stopom 33,3/1000 bolesničkih dana bilo s potvrđenom bolničkom infekcijom (BI). Od navedenih bolesnika, 13 (18,57%) je imalo infekciju dvaju organskih sustava, dok su kod 5 (7,15%) bolesnika klinički uzročnici dokazani u trima organskim sustavima. Prevladavale su infekcije respiratornog sustava (54,84%) – sa stopom 18,3/1000, potom infekcije mokraćnog sustava (26,88%) – sa stopom 8,9/1000, a najrjeđe su dokazane infekcije krvotoka (18,28%) – sa stopom 6,1/1000. Acinetobacter baumannii i Pseudomonas aeruginosa bili su najčešći uzročnici respiratornih infekcija i infekcija krvotoka. Najčešći uzročnici urinarnih infekcija su Enterococcus spp i Candida albicans. Zaključak: Bolničke infekcije značajan su zdravstveni problem koji povećava morbiditet i mortalitet bolesnika, naročito u jedinicama za intenzivno liječenje te je, stoga, potrebno poduzeti značajne mjere kako bi se smanjila njihova učestalost. Prema rezultatima našeg istraživanja, zastupljenost infekcija respiratornog sustava u JIL-u viša je nego u većini drugih sličnih istraživanja.

Discipline and Commoditize: How U-Visas Exploit the Pain of Gender-Based Violence

U-Visas are granted to immigrant survivors of gender-based crimes. I use critical discourse analysis to examine 100 U-visa cases. I present two arguments. First, U-Visa adjudication establishes a panoptics of pain that disciplines survivors. The panoptics of pain transforms immigrant suffering into objects of scientific knowledge. Second, U-Visas establish an economy of pain that commoditizes survivors’ suffering. The economy of pain establishes transactional exchanges between immigrants and state agencies while generating economic profits for carceral corporations. I conclude with microlevel policy reforms to make U-Visas less exploitative of petitioners, and macrolevel policy reforms to empower working-class immigrants and prevent gender-based violence.

A Fraught Pairing

This chapter examines the tensions inherent in the U visa, a form of immigration relief that provides survivors of intimate partner violence a path to lawful status. Receipt of the U visa is contingent upon compulsory and continuing cooperation with law enforcement, which does not reflect the reality of the lives of many survivors of domestic violence, especially immigrant victims, who are uniquely unable, fearful or disinclined to engage with the state. As such, the vulnerabilities the U visa was intended to address are exacerbated and benefits to police and prosecutors are achieved at the expense of the victims Congress sought to protect.

Producing Immigrant Victims’ “Right” to Legal Status and the Management of Legal Uncertainty

This article investigates how lawyers manage legal and bureaucratic uncertainties associated with humanitarian immigration law by examining their representation of undocumented crime victims petitioning for U Visa status. Immigration attorneys craft dual narratives to persuade adjudicators that their clients qualify for and deserve this new legal status, but representing migrants well creates moral dilemmas. I explore how lawyers elicit and script narratives of “clean” victimhood to demonstrate that their clients qualify for U Visa standing. Next I argue that attorneys construct narratives articulating migrants’ civic engagement to position their clients as contributing members of society who deserve legal status. The final section illustrates how the production of these narratives generates a range of professional and ethical dilemmas for lawyers. This examination of how law is developed within a confining legal framework that is at the same time not totally institutionalized extends the “law in action” paradigm, which has been animated primarily by analyses of how legal actors tailor the idiosyncratic details of discrete cases to match existing precedents.