scholarly journals The Impact of Reported Penicillin Allergy in Hospitalized Patients with Hematological Malignancies Requiring Antibiotics

2017 ◽  
Vol 139 (2) ◽  
pp. AB28
Author(s):  
Kuan-Hsiang G. Huang ◽  
Olajumoke Fadugba ◽  
Valerie C. Cluzet ◽  
Keith Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
Hematological Malignancies ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Penicillin Allergy ◽  
The Impact

Impact of Penicillin Allergy Label on Length of Stay and Mortality in Hospitalized Patients through a Clinical Administrative National Dataset

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Montserrat Pérez-Encinas ◽  
Susana Lorenzo-Martínez ◽  
Juan Emilio Losa-García ◽  
Stefan Walter ◽  
Miguel Angel Tejedor-Alonso
Keyword(s):  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
National Level ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Penicillin Allergy ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Hospital System ◽  
The Impact

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Penicillin allergy is a common problem in the management of infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of penicillin allergy on length of hospital stay (LOHS) among hospitalized adult patients and on in-hospital mortality at a national level. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A retrospective cohort study of adult patients discharged from the Spanish Hospital System between 2006 and 2015 was conducted using the Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS). We compared LOHS and in-hospital mortality of adult patients whose records contained penicillin allergy code V14.0 (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification) as a secondary diagnosis, with a random sample without such a code. <b><i>Results:</i></b> We identified 981,291 admissions with code V14.0, which corresponded to 2.63% of all hospitalizations. Adults patients with a penicillin allergy label were significantly older than patients without such a label, with a median of 70 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 51–80) versus 63 years (IQR: 40–77). The proportion of women and the prevalence of infectious diseases were higher in the group with a penicillin allergy label (61.40% vs. 53.84%; 34.04% vs. 30.01%; respectively). We found a higher median Elixhauser-Van Walraven score in hospitalized patients with an allergy label. The median LOHS for hospitalizations with a penicillin allergy label (5 [IQR: 2–9]) was significantly longer than that in those without such a label (4 [IQR: 2–9]). Multivariate analysis showed an increase in LOHS due to the penicillin allergy label (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.061 [1.057–1.065]) and a decrease in mortality in penicillin allergy records (OR [95% CI]: 0.834 [0.825–0.844]). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> In our study, the prevalence of a penicillin allergy label in hospitalized patients, using the MBDS, is low. Hospitalizations with an allergy label was associated with a longer LOHS. However, penicillin-allergic patients did not show higher mortality rates. Inaccurate reporting of penicillin allergies may have an impact on healthcare resources.

scholarly journals Decitabine Promotes Modulation in Phenotype and Function of Monocytes and Macrophages That Drive Immune Response Regulation

Cells ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 868
Author(s):  
Fabiana Albani Zambuzi ◽  
Priscilla Mariane Cardoso-Silva ◽  
Ricardo Cardoso Castro ◽  
Caroline Fontanari ◽  
Flavio da Silva Emery ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Response ◽  
Hematological Malignancies ◽  
M2 Macrophage ◽  
M2 Polarization ◽  
Tnf Α ◽  
Monocytes And Macrophages ◽  
Ifn Γ ◽  
And Function ◽  
The Impact

Decitabine is an approved hypomethylating agent used for treating hematological malignancies. Although decitabine targets altered cells, epidrugs can trigger immunomodulatory effects, reinforcing the hypothesis of immunoregulation in treated patients. We therefore aimed to evaluate the impact of decitabine treatment on the phenotype and functions of monocytes and macrophages, which are pivotal cells of the innate immunity system. In vitro decitabine administration increased bacterial phagocytosis and IL-8 release, but impaired microbicidal activity of monocytes. In addition, during monocyte-to-macrophage differentiation, treatment promoted the M2-like profile, with increased expression of CD206 and ALOX15. Macrophages also demonstrated reduced infection control when exposed to Mycobacterium tuberculosis in vitro. However, cytokine production remained unchanged, indicating an atypical M2 macrophage. Furthermore, when macrophages were cocultured with lymphocytes, decitabine induced a reduction in the release of inflammatory cytokines such as IL-1β, TNF-α, and IFN-γ, maintaining IL-10 production, suggesting that decitabine could potentialize M2 polarization and might be considered as a therapeutic against the exacerbated immune response.

scholarly journals Impact of simple, specific, verbal instructions on the quality of bowel preparation in hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 09 (03) ◽  
pp. E378-E387
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Triantafyllou ◽  
Paraskevas Gkolfakis ◽  
Alexandros Skamnelos ◽  
Georgia Diamantopoulou ◽  
Athanasios Dagas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Verbal Instructions ◽  
Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background and study aims Bowel preparation for colonoscopy is frequently inadequate in hospitalized patients. We explored the impact of specific verbal instructions on the quality of inpatients bowel preparation and factors associated with preparation failure. Patients and methods Randomized (1:1), two strata (mobilized vs. bedridden; 3:2) trial of consecutive inpatients from four tertiary centers, who received either specific, verbal instructions or the standard of care (SOC) ward instructions about bowel preparation. The rate of adequate bowel preparation (Boston Bowel Preparation Score [BBPS] ≥ 6, no segment < 2) comprised the primary endpoint. Mean BBPS score, good (BBPS score ≥ 7, no segment score < 2) and excellent (BBPS = 9) were among secondary endpoints. Results We randomized 300 inpatients (180 mobile) aged 71.7 ± 15.1 years in the intervention (49.7 %) and SOC (50.3 %) groups, respectively. Overall, more patients in the intervention group achieved adequate bowel preparation, but this difference did not reach statistical significance neither in the intention-to-treat [90/149 (60.4 %) vs. 82/151 (54.3 %); P = 0.29] nor in the per-protocol analysis [90/129 (69.8 %) vs. 82/132 (62.1 %); P = 0.19]. Overall BBPS score did not differ statistical significantly in the two groups, but the provision of specific verbal instructions was associated with significant higher rates of good (58.1 % vs. 43.2 %; P = 0.02) and excellent (31.8 % vs. 16.7 %; P = 0.004) bowel preparation compared to the SOC group. Administration of same-day bowel preparation and patient American Society of Anesthesiologists score > 2 were identified as risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation. Conclusions Provision of specific verbal instructions did not increase the rate of adequate bowel preparation in a population of mobilized and bedridden hospitalized patients.

Performance of the Wells score in predicting deep vein thrombosis in medical and surgical hospitalized patients with or without thromboprophylaxis: The R-WITT study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1358863X2199467
Author(s):  
Jean-Eudes Trihan ◽  
Michael Adam ◽  
Sara Jidal ◽  
Isabelle Aichoun ◽  
Sarah Coudray ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Operating Characteristics ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Ultrasound Study ◽  
Wells Score ◽  
Deep Vein ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Test Probability

The Wells score had shown weak performance to determine pre-test probability of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) for inpatients. So, we evaluated the impact of thromboprophylaxis on the utility of the Wells score for risk stratification of inpatients with suspected DVT. This bicentric cross-sectional study from February 1, 2018 to January 31, 2019 included consecutive medical and surgical inpatients who underwent lower limb ultrasound study for suspected DVT. Wells score clinical predictors were assessed by both ordering and vascular physicians within 24 h after clinical suspicion of DVT. Primary outcome was the Wells score’s accuracy for pre-test risk stratification of suspected DVT, accounting for anticoagulation (AC) treatment (thromboprophylaxis for ⩾ 72 hours or long-term anticoagulation). We compared prevalence of proximal DVT among the low, moderate and high pre-test probability groups. The discrimination accuracy was defined as area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. Of the 415 included patients, 30 (7.2%) had proximal DVT. Prevalence of proximal DVT was lower than expected in all pre-test probability groups. The prevalence in low, moderate and high pre-test probability groups was 0.0%, 3.1% and 8.2% ( p = 0.22) and 1.7%, 4.2% and 25.8% ( p < 0.001) for inpatients with or without AC, respectively. Area under ROC curves for discriminatory accuracy of the Wells score, for risk of proximal DVT with or without AC, was 0.72 and 0.88, respectively. The Wells score performed poorly for discrimination of risk for proximal DVT in hospitalized patients with AC but performed reasonably well among patients without AC; and showed low inter-rater reliability between physicians. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03784937.

scholarly journals Clinical Management of Hypertension, Inflammation and Thrombosis in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: Impact on Survival and Concerns

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073
Author(s):  
Patricia Martínez-Botía ◽  
Ángel Bernardo ◽  
Andrea Acebes-Huerta ◽  
Alberto Caro ◽  
Blanca Leoz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Arterial Hypertension ◽  
Clinical Management ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor Blockers ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Clinical Manifestations ◽  
Specific Treatment ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Thrombosis Prophylaxis ◽  
The Impact

The most severe clinical manifestations of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), are due to an unbalanced immune response and a pro-thrombotic hemostatic disturbance, with arterial hypertension or diabetes as acknowledged risk factors. While waiting for a specific treatment, the clinical management of hospitalized patients is still a matter of debate, and the effectiveness of treatments to manage clinical manifestations and comorbidities has been questioned. In this study, we aim to assess the impact of the clinical management of arterial hypertension, inflammation and thrombosis on the survival of COVID-19 patients. The Spanish cohorts included in this observational retrospective study are from HM Hospitales (2035 patients) and from Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias (72 patients). Kaplan Meier survival curves, Cox regression and propensity score matching analyses were employed, considering demographic variables, comorbidities and treatment arms (when opportune) as covariates. The management of arterial hypertension with angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers is not detrimental, as was initially reported, and neither was the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). On the contrary, our analysis shows that the use on itself of corticosteroids is not beneficial. Importantly, the management of COVID-19 patients with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as an anticoagulant significantly improves the survival of hospitalized patients. These results delineate the current treatment options under debate, supporting the effectiveness of thrombosis prophylaxis on COVID-19 patients as a first-line treatment without the need for compromising the treatment of comorbidities, while suggesting cautiousness when administering corticosteroids.

scholarly journals Perception and Impact of Life Events in Medically Hospitalized Patients With Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 699-705
Author(s):  
Katherine K. Bedard-Thomas ◽  
Simona Bujoreanu ◽  
Christine H. Choi ◽  
Patricia I. Ibeziako
Keyword(s):  
Life Events ◽  
Somatic Symptom ◽  
Functional Disability ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Health Care Use ◽  
Life Event ◽  
Academic Events ◽  
The Impact

OBJECTIVES: We describe the prevalence and perceived impact of life events reported by medically hospitalized patients with somatic symptom and related disorders (SSRD) and highlight patient characteristics and outcomes associated with highly impactful life events. METHODS: Retrospective chart reviews were conducted of patients with SSRD at a tertiary pediatric hospital who were seen by the psychiatry consultation service and completed various instruments while medically admitted, including a de novo life events checklist. Descriptive statistics, correlations, χ2 tests, and internal consistency analyses were used. RESULTS: Charts of 70.2% of patients with SSRD who completed the life events checklist (N = 172; age range 8–25 years) were reviewed. Of those studied, 94% reported at least 1 life event in the last year, with academic events most prevalent, 81% reported life events across multiple domains, and 56% perceived the life event(s) as having a great impact on their lives. Patients who perceived more great impact life events were older, from households with lower median incomes, had higher self-reported somatization, greater functional disability, more comorbid psychiatric diagnoses, required more psychotropic medications, and had longer medical admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Findings reveal that although the majority of medically hospitalized patients with SSRD reported at least 1 relevant life event, it was the patients’ perception of the impact of the life event(s) that correlated with high levels of disability and health care use. An assessment of the perception of life events in patients with SSRD may help hospitalists and interdisciplinary providers identify high-risk patients for whom early psychiatry referrals can be made.

THE IMPACT OF OUTPATIENT INHALED CORTICOSTEROID THERAPY ON DISEASE SEVERITY IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS WITH COMMUNITY ACQUIRED PNEUMONIA

CHEST Journal ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 134 (4) ◽  
pp. 16S
Author(s):  
Rosa Malo de Molina ◽  
Eric M. Mortensen ◽  
Patricia Castellanos-Matteus ◽  
Antonio Anzueto ◽  
Marcos I. Restrepo
Keyword(s):  
Disease Severity ◽  
Corticosteroid Therapy ◽  
Community Acquired Pneumonia ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroid ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Impact of remdesivir on 28 day mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: February 2021 Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Robinson ◽  
Vidhya Prakash ◽  
Raad Al Tamimi ◽  
Nour Albast ◽  
Basma Al-Bast ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Usual Care ◽  
English Language ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severity Of Illness ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Analysis Process ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Impact

AbstractBackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has stimulated worldwide investigation into a myriad of potential therapeutic agents, including antivirals such as remdesivir. The first RCT reporting results on the impact of remdesivir on COVID-19 in a peer reviewed journal was the ACTT-1 trial published in November, 2020. The ACTT-1 trial showed more rapid clinical improvement and a reduced risk of 28-day mortality in patients who received remdesivir.This study is a meta-analysis of peer reviewed RCTs aims to estimate the association of remdesivir therapy compared to the usual care or placebo on all-cause mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Software based tools to accelerate the analysis process.MethodsMeta-analysis of peer reviewed RCTs comparing remdesivir to usual care or placebo. The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered and published in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021229985) on February 5, 2021.ResultsFour English language RCTs were identified, including data from 7,333 hospitalized patients worldwide using remdesivir in COVID-19 positive patients.Meta-analysis of all identified RCTs showed no difference in survival in patients who received remdesivir therapy compared to usual care or placebo. The random effects meta-analysis has a summary odd ratio is 0.89 (95% CI 0.65-1.21, p = 0.30). Considerable variability in the severity of illness is noted with the rates of IMV at the time of randomization ranging from 0% to 27%.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published in peer-reviewed literature by February 1, 2021 did not show reduced mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received remdesivir. Further research is needed to clarify the role of remdesivir therapy in the management of COVID-19.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document