It’s been a while since I’ve featured research from Iran. This work is focused on bandages, burns, and nanoparticles according to an Oct. 18, 2016 news item on Nanowerk (Note: A link has been removed),
Pre-treating the fabric surface of the bandages used to treat burns with enzymes and polyethylene glycol or cellulase may promote the adhesion of antibacterial nanoparticles and improve their bacteria-repelling ability. These are the findings of a group of scientists from the Islamic Azad University, Iran, published in The Journal of The Textile Institute (“NiO-/cotton- modified nanocomposite as a medication model for bacterial-related burn infection”).
An Oct. 18, 2016 Taylor & Francis (Publishing) Group press release (received via email), which originated the news item, expands on the theme,
Injuries caused by burns are a global health problem, with the World Health Organisation citing 195,000 deaths per year worldwide as a result of burns from fires alone. Burn injuries are particularly susceptible to infections, hospital-acquired or otherwise, with the bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa accounting for over half of all severe burn infections.
Noble metal (particularly silver) antimicrobials have long been identified as having potential for combating bacterial infection; however, there are concerns about dressings adhering to wounds and toxic effects on skin cells. Currently, scientists are researching nanoparticles which can be used to introduce these antimicrobial properties into the textiles used in dressings.
The authors of this paper have studied 150 cases to identify the most common infections in burns. In the paper, they also identified a method for giving cotton bandages antibacterial properties by coating the fabric surface with a Nickel oxide (NiO)/organic polymer/enzyme matrix in order to promote their bacteria-resistant qualities and suitability for use on burn victims.
Pseudomonas and Staphylococci infections emerged as the two most common pathogens in the Iran Burn Centre, where the study took place, and the authors evaluated their design of the bandage against these as well as fifteen other strains of bacteria. They conclude by proposing further studies into the combination of bactericidal polymers with bacteria-killing metal-oxide nanoparticles in cotton fabrics. Whilst their current design does not meet the criteria for a susceptibility test, they are hopeful that further studies will reveal the clinical relevance of their design.
Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,
NiO-/cotton- modified nanocomposite as a medication model for bacterial-related burn infections by Azadeh Basiri, Nasrin Talebian & Monir Doudi. The Journal of The Textile Institute http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2016.1222863
Pages 1-9 Published online: 12 Sep 2016
This paper is behind a paywall.
*’Cellulase’ changed to ‘Cellulose’ Nov. 15, 2016 at 1832 PT and changed back again on Nov. 16, 2016. Sorry for the confusion but by the time I published this piece I’d forgotten checking to confirm the existence of cellulase.
I don’t know much about nanotechnology, so I can’t comment on the research qualities of the paper. However, I did notice two instances of plagiarised sentences: “Despite aggressive local and systemic treatment to minimize infection, severe burn wounds continue to become infected with environmental and nosocomial pathogens at relatively high rates.” which appeared in a 2013 article by DP Nicols et al. at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3713079/ ; and “Burn injuries are one of the major global health problems. As a recent report of World Health Organization, every year 195,000 people from all over the world die because of fire alone.” which appeared in a 2012 article by Abhilasha Varma at http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=25577.php. I wonder if plagiarism is becoming more common in peer-reviewed journals.
Hi Susan M. Scott, Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment. I don’t know if plagiarizing is becoming more common in peer-reviewed journals. There certainly seems to be more awareness of the problem. I do think there is more pressure on scientists and suspect it is getting more common. Did you see Peter Higgs’s comments shortly after he received the Nobel Prize for physics? He said that if he were starting out today, he wouldn’t have had a career in science due to the pressure to produce.
I noticed that the second line you quoted is from the news release and (on the off chance you’re not familiar with this practice) it is quite common for factual information of that order to be reproduced in various news releases and articles. In fact, that line could have come from a WHO news release originally. Many articles in newspapers and online publications have sentences and whole passages reproduced under someone’s byline. In some cases, almost the entire news release has been reproduced word for word. Some small change has to be made in order to justify the use of a byline but the change is often the addition of a lede sentence or lede paragraph while the rest remains untouched. That practice is not confined to popular media; I’ve seen examples in technical and scientific publications.
I sweat sometimes wondering if I’ve inadvertently plagiarized someone. That happens too.
What a stimulating start to my morning.
Cheers,
Maryse