Introduction
Deep bacterial infections are a serious threat to the life and health of patients and, because of their invisibility, difficulty of diagnosis and complexity of treatment, there have been many challenges to treatment at the primary level. However, with the progressive development of medical technology and the gradual improvement of the level of primary care, there has also been a significant development in the treatment of in-depth bacterial infections.
II. Past dilemmas in primary health-care facilities for the treatment of deep bacterial infections
(i) Limited diagnostic capacity
1. Poor laboratory conditions
Basic medical institutions often lack advanced microbiological detection equipment, such as high-precision fungi incubators, gene sequencing machines, etc. This makes it difficult to identify the pathogens of deep bacterial infections and does not allow for a precise distinction between different types of fungi, such as pyroclacteria, fungus, invisibility, etc., affecting subsequent targeted treatment.
2. Insufficient professional staff
There is a relative lack of knowledge and experience among primary health-care personnel in the diagnosis of deep bacterial infections. When clinical performance is unusual, other infectious or non-infective diseases, such as pulmonary fungus infections, are subject to misdiagnosis as common pneumonia, thus delaying treatment.
(ii) Single treatment
1. Limited range of drugs
In the past, there were insufficient stocks of anti-fist drugs in primary health-care institutions, mostly traditional anti-fist drugs. New and efficient anti-facter drugs, such as thracin, are often difficult to obtain at the grass-roots level. This limits doctors ‘ choice of treatment for different types of deep bacterial infections and does not provide effective treatment for some patients with drug-resistant infections.
2. Lack of comprehensive treatment
In addition to drug treatment, deep bacterial infections may require a combination of surgery and nutritional support. In the past, however, primary health-care institutions have often been unable to carry out the relevant surgical treatment and lacked the capacity to assess and support the overall nutrition of patients.
III. Developments in primary health-care facilities for the treatment of deep bacterial infections
(i) Upgrading of diagnostic techniques
1. Improved laboratory detection methods
A number of simpler and faster fungal detection techniques have been introduced in primary health-care institutions. For example, the use of fungi antigens test reagents, which allow rapid detection of fungi antigens in blood or body fluids, such as the Invisible Spectrum Multi-sugar Antigens, provides a basis for early diagnosis. At the same time, a number of grass-roots laboratories have stepped up their cooperation with higher-level medical institutions, which conduct accurate diagnostics using advanced equipment from higher-level institutions through the screening of specimens.
2. Training and education enhancement
Through continuous medical education and training, the awareness and capacity of medical personnel at the grass-roots level for the diagnosis of deep bacterial infections has been increased. They are better able to combine the patient ‘ s medical history, clinical performance and the results of laboratory examinations and reduce the rate of error. For example, patients with long-term broad spectrum antibiotics and immunosuppressants are known to be vulnerable to deep bacterial infections, and the possibility of deep bacterial infections can be taken into account when they experience symptoms such as undisclosed causes of fever, cough, etc.
(ii) Increased level of treatment
1. Improved access to drugs
At present, there is a growing proliferation of anti-fist drugs in primary health-care facilities. Not only are there common fluorine, etc., but some new anti-facter drugs are beginning to be available at the grass-roots level. At the same time, policies such as the centralization of drug purchases have reduced the cost of drugs and enabled patients to access more appropriate treatment. In addition, the use of anti-foulbacterial drugs is more regulated by primary doctors, who are able to reasonably select and adjust the dose according to the antibacterial spectrometry of the drug, its physicokinetic characteristics.
2. Development of comprehensive treatment
Some of the primary health-care institutions are engaged in surgical treatment of in-depth bacterial infections, where available. For example, in cases of restricted infections such as pulmonary fungus balls, surgical assistance can be used to remove them. With regard to nutritional support, primary health-care institutions have also begun to focus on nutritional assessment and intervention for people with deep bacterial infections, developing individualized nutritional support programmes based on the patient ‘ s condition, and improving the patient ‘ s immunity and supporting treatment.
IV. The way forward
(i) Further improvement of the diagnostic system
Introduction of advanced diagnostic techniques
With the development of technology and lower costs, it is expected that more advanced diagnostic techniques, such as bedside rapid genetic diagnostic equipment, will be introduced in primary health-care institutions to achieve rapid and accurate identification of pathogens infected by deep bacteria in order to initiate timely and accurate treatment.
2. Development of a telemedicine diagnostic model
To make full use of Internet technology and establish a telemedicine diagnostic platform with higher-level medical institutions. Medical doctors at the grass-roots level can transmit patients ‘ clinical information, video-testing, laboratory examination results in real time to specialists who conduct remote diagnostics and guidance to improve the accuracy of the diagnosis.
(ii) Optimizing treatment programmes
1. Individualized treatment
Individualized antifibacterial treatment programmes are developed on the basis of the patient ‘ s genetic characteristics, immune status, etc. Use of genetic testing techniques to predict patients ‘ response to different anti-foulbacterial drugs, improve treatment effectiveness and reduce adverse drug responses.
2. Strengthening multidisciplinary collaboration
Further strengthening of multidisciplinary collaboration within primary health-care institutions and with higher-level medical institutions. Multidisciplinary teams, including the internal medicine, surgery, testing and nutrition departments, are involved in the treatment of patients infected with in-depth bacterial infections, increasing the level of integrated treatment and improving the patient ‘ s prognosis.
Conclusions
There has been some progress in the treatment of in-depth bacterial infections at the primary level, from diagnostic techniques to treatment. However, there are still challenges to be met in the future by improving the diagnostic system and optimizing treatment programmes to further improve the capacity of primary health-care institutions to treat in-depth bacterial infections, to better serve patients and to reduce the risk to their life and health posed by such serious infectious diseases.
