scholarly journals Thoracic Surgery Consultations in COVID-19 Critically Ill Patients: Beyond Conservative Approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Yasser Aljehani ◽  
Sharifah A. Othman ◽  
Yousif Almubarak ◽  
Ayman Elbaz ◽  
Mohammed Sabry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Thoracic Surgery ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Mediastinal Emphysema ◽  
Conservative Approach ◽  
Tube Insertion ◽  
Eastern Province ◽  
Thoracostomy Tube ◽  
Prolonged Intubation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Worse Prognosis

Introduction. Iatrogenic pneumothoracis, barotraumas, and tracheoesophageal fistulae, especially after prolonged intubation, and tracheal stenosis are all entities involving thoracic surgeons’ consultation and management. With the surge of COVID-19 cases particularly in the critical care settings, various types of complications have been observed that require intervention from thoracic surgeons. Methods and Materials. A retrospective study was conducted in an academic healthcare institute in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. We included all COVID-19 cases admitted to ICU in the period between March 15, 2020, and August 15, 2020, requiring thoracic surgery consultation and management. Non-COVID-19 critical cases and iatrogenic pneumothorax were excluded. Results. Of 122 patients who were admitted to ICU with COVID-19, 18 patients (14.75%) required thoracic surgery consultation and management. We discovered a significant association between the outcomes and reintubation rates and the rate of pneumothorax occurrence. The survival analysis showed improvement in patients who had thoracostomy tube insertion as a management than the group who were treated conservatively. On the other hand, there was a significant difference between the COVID ICU group who had thoracic complication and those who did not regarding the length of hospital stay. Conclusion. Noniatrogenic pneumothorax, subcutaneous emphysema, and mediastinal emphysema are well-known thoracic entities, but their presence in the context of COVID-19 disease is a harbinger for worse prognosis and outcomes. The presence of pneumothorax may be associated with better prognosis and outcome compared to surgical and mediastinal emphysema.

Effect of Chewing Gum on Bowel Motility in Women Undergoing Post-Operative Cesarean Section

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (06) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr.Randa Mohammed AboBaker
Keyword(s):  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Chewing Gum ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Bowel Motility ◽  
Gum Chewing ◽  
Significant Difference

Postoperative Ileus (POI) is one of the most common problems after obstetrics, gynecologic and abdominal surgeries. Sham feeding, such as gum chewing, accelerates the return of bowel function and the length of hospital stay. The present study aims to evaluate the effect of chewing gum on bowel motility in women undergoing post-operative cesarean section. Intervention study was used at the Postpartum Department of Maternity and Children Hospital, KSA. A randomized controlled clinical trial research design. Through a convenience technique, 80 post Caesarian Section (CS) women were included in the study. Data were collected through three tools: Tool (I): Socio-demographic data and reproductive history interview schedule. Tool (II): Postoperative Assessment Sheet. Tool (III): Outcomes of gum chewing and the length of hospital stay.  Method: subjects were assigned randomly into two groups of (40) the experimental and (40) the control. Subjects in the study group were asked to chew two pieces of sugarless gum for 30 min/three times daily in the morning, noon, and evening immediately after recovery from anesthesia and in Postpartum Department; while subjects in the control group followed the hospital routine care. Each woman in both groups was tested abdominally using a stethoscope to auscultate the bowel sounds and asked to report immediately the time of either passing flatus or stool. Results: illustrated that a highly statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups concerning their gum chewing outcomes. Where, P = 0.000. The study concluded that gum chewing is safe, well tolerated and appears to be effective in reducing the incidence and consequences of POI following CS.

scholarly journals Surviving Burn Injury: Drivers of Length of Hospital Stay

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 761
Author(s):  
Chimdimma Noelyn Onah ◽  
Richard Allmendinger ◽  
Julia Handl ◽  
Ken W. Dunn
Keyword(s):  
Mental Status ◽  
Burn Injury ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Burn Patients ◽  
Emotional Needs ◽  
Effective Care ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Unitary Model ◽  
Hospital Resources

With a reduction in the mortality rate of burn patients, length of stay (LOS) has been increasingly adopted as an outcome measure. Some studies have attempted to identify factors that explain a burn patient’s LOS. However, few have investigated the association between LOS and a patient’s mental and socioeconomic status. There is anecdotal evidence for links between these factors; uncovering these will aid in better addressing the specific physical and emotional needs of burn patients and facilitate the planning of scarce hospital resources. Here, we employ machine learning (clustering) and statistical models (regression) to investigate whether segmentation by socioeconomic/mental status can improve the performance and interpretability of an upstream predictive model, relative to a unitary model. Although we found no significant difference in the unitary model’s performance and the segment-specific models, the interpretation of the segment-specific models reveals a reduced impact of burn severity in LOS prediction with increasing adverse socioeconomic and mental status. Furthermore, the socioeconomic segments’ models highlight an increased influence of living circumstances and source of injury on LOS. These findings suggest that in addition to ensuring that patients’ physical needs are met, management of their mental status is crucial for delivering an effective care plan.

Stereotactic Electroencephalography Is Associated With Reduced Pain and Opioid Use When Compared with Subdural Grids: A Case Series

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan P Scoville ◽  
Evan Joyce ◽  
Joshua Hunsaker ◽  
Jared Reese ◽  
Herschel Wilde ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Chart Review ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Surgical Methods ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract BACKGROUND Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been shown to decrease length of hospital stay and opioid use. OBJECTIVE To identify whether surgery for epilepsy mapping via MIS stereotactically placed electroencephalography (SEEG) electrodes decreased overall opioid use when compared with craniotomy for EEG grid placement (ECoG). METHODS Patients who underwent surgery for epilepsy mapping, either SEEG or ECoG, were identified through retrospective chart review from 2015 through 2018. The hospital stay was separated into specific time periods to distinguish opioid use immediately postoperatively, throughout the rest of the stay and at discharge. The total amount of opioids consumed during each period was calculated by transforming all types of opioids into their morphine equivalents (ME). Pain scores were also collected using a modification of the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) scale. The 2 surgical groups were compared using appropriate statistical tests. RESULTS The study identified 43 patients who met the inclusion criteria: 36 underwent SEEG placement and 17 underwent craniotomy grid placement. There was a statistically significant difference in median opioid consumption per hospital stay between the ECoG and the SEEG placement groups, 307.8 vs 71.5 ME, respectively (P = .0011). There was also a significant difference in CAPA scales between the 2 groups (P = .0117). CONCLUSION Opioid use is significantly lower in patients who undergo MIS epilepsy mapping via SEEG compared with those who undergo the more invasive ECoG procedure. As part of efforts to decrease the overall opioid burden, these results should be considered by patients and surgeons when deciding on surgical methods.

scholarly journals Ampicillin-Ceftriaxone vs Ampicillin-Gentamicin for Definitive Therapy of Enterococcus faecalis Infective Endocarditis: A Propensity Score–Matched, Retrospective Cohort Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Niyati H Shah ◽  
Kathleen A Shutt ◽  
Yohei Doi
Keyword(s):  
Infective Endocarditis ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cohort Analysis ◽  
Hospital Readmissions ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
The United States ◽  
Aminoglycoside Resistance ◽  
Definitive Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Ampicillin-ceftriaxone (AC) has emerged as an alternative antibiotic regimen for enterococcal infective endocarditis (EIE) with reduced toxicity compared with ampicillin-gentamicin (AG), but evidence regarding its success in reducing EIE-associated death in the United States is limited. Methods We conducted a retrospective, propensity score–matched cohort analysis of EIE patients treated with AC or AG between 2010 and 2017 at 3 hospitals in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. We assessed all-cause 90-day mortality as the primary outcome and in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions, adverse events, and relapse of bacteremia as the secondary outcomes. Results A total of 190 patients with EIE (100 treated with AC and 90 with AG) were included. Ninety-day mortality was significantly higher with AC than AG (21% vs 8%; P = .02). After propensity score matching, 56 patients in each group remained for the outcomes analysis. Documented aminoglycoside resistance, presence of annular or aortic abscess, and complete pacemaker removal were the significantly different variables between the 2 matched cohorts. We observed no statistically significant difference in 90-day mortality between the 2 treatment groups (11% vs 7%; P = .55). Adverse events were more common in patients treated with AG (25 vs 39; P = .0091), and more patients in the propensity score–matched AG cohort switched antibiotic regimens than in the AC group (10% vs 49%; P < .0001). Conclusions Patients treated with AC demonstrate no significant differences in mortality, treatment failure, or bacteremia relapse compared with AG in a propensity score–matched EIE cohort.

scholarly journals Methylprednisolone or dexamethasone, which one is superior corticosteroid in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a triple-blinded randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keivan Ranjbar ◽  
Mohsen Moghadami ◽  
Alireza Mirahmadizadeh ◽  
Mohammad Javad Fallahi ◽  
Vahid Khaloo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Ordinal Scale ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Although almost a year has passed since the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak and promising reports of vaccines have been presented, we still have a long way until these measures are available for all. Furthermore, the most appropriate corticosteroid and dose in the treatment of COVID-19 have remained uncertain. We conducted a study to assess the effectiveness of methylprednisolone treatment versus dexamethasone for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods In this prospective triple-blinded randomized controlled trial, we enrolled 86 hospitalized COVID-19 patients from August to November 2020, in Shiraz, Iran. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups to receive either methylprednisolone (2 mg/kg/day; intervention group) or dexamethasone (6 mg/kg/day; control group). Data were assessed based on a 9-point WHO ordinal scale extending from uninfected (point 0) to death (point 8). Results There were no significant differences between the groups on admission. However, the intervention group demonstrated significantly better clinical status compared to the control group at day 5 (4.02 vs. 5.21, p = 0.002) and day 10 (2.90 vs. 4.71, p = 0.001) of admission. There was also a significant difference in the overall mean score between the intervention group and the control group, (3.909 vs. 4.873 respectively, p = 0.004). The mean length of hospital stay was 7.43 ± 3.64 and 10.52 ± 5.47 days in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p = 0.015). The need for a ventilator was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (18.2% vs 38.1% p = 0.040). Conclusion In hospitalized hypoxic COVID-19 patients, methylprednisolone demonstrated better results compared to dexamethasone. Trial registration The trial was registered with IRCT.IR (08/04/2020-No. IRCT20200204046369N1).

scholarly journals Effects of early corticosteroid use in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong Hoon Hyun ◽  
Moo Hyun Kim ◽  
Yujin Sohn ◽  
Yunsuk Cho ◽  
Yae Jee Baek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Case Fatality ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Corticosteroid Treatment ◽  
Threshold Value ◽  
Steroid Use ◽  
Corticosteroid Administration ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Early Use

Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome, and corticosteroids have been considered as possible therapeutic agents for this disease. However, there is limited literature on the appropriate timing of corticosteroid administration to obtain the best possible patient outcomes. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study including patients with severe COVID-19 who received corticosteroid treatment from March 2 to June 30, 2020 in seven tertiary hospitals in South Korea. We analyzed the patient demographics, characteristics, and clinical outcomes according to the timing of steroid use. Twenty-two patients with severe COVID-19 were enrolled, and they were all treated with corticosteroids. Results Of the 22 patients who received corticosteroids, 12 patients (55%) were treated within 10 days from diagnosis. There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics. The initial PaO2/FiO2 ratio was 168.75. The overall case fatality rate was 25%. The mean time from diagnosis to steroid use was 4.08 days and the treatment duration was 14 days in the early use group, while those in the late use group were 12.80 days and 18.50 days, respectively. The PaO2/FiO2 ratio, C-reactive protein level, and cycle threshold value improved over time in both groups. In the early use group, the time from onset of symptoms to discharge (32.4 days vs. 60.0 days, P = 0.030), time from diagnosis to discharge (27.8 days vs. 57.4 days, P = 0.024), and hospital stay (26.0 days vs. 53.9 days, P = 0.033) were shortened. Conclusions Among patients with severe COVID-19, early use of corticosteroids showed favorable clinical outcomes which were related to a reduction in the length of hospital stay.

scholarly journals 48. Association of Rapid Pathogen Identification and Pharmacist Intervention on Time to Optimal Antimicrobial Therapy for Bloodstream Infections at Two Community Hospitals

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S47-S47
Author(s):  
Bryant M Froberg ◽  
Nicholas Torney
Keyword(s):  
Blood Culture ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Positive Blood Culture ◽  
Antimicrobial Therapy ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Pharmacist Intervention ◽  
Pathogen Identification ◽  
Community Hospitals ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background As many as 1 in 3 patients with bloodstream infections at community hospitals receive inappropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy. Studies have shown that the coupling of real-time intervention with rapid pathogen identification improves patient outcomes and decreases health-system costs at large, tertiary academic centers. The aim of this study was to assess if similar outcomes could be obtained with the implementation of real-time pharmacist intervention to rapid pathogen identification at two smaller, rural community hospitals. Methods This was a pre-post implementation study that occurred from September of 2019 to March 2020. This study included patients ≥18 years of age admitted with one positive blood culture. Patients were excluded if they were pregnant, had a polymicrobial blood culture, known culture prior to admission, hospice consulted prior to admission, expired prior to positive blood culture, or transferred to another hospital within 24 hours of a positive blood culture. Endpoints of patients prior to intervention were compared to patients post-implementation. The primary endpoint was time to optimal antimicrobial therapy. Secondary endpoints included time to effective antimicrobial therapy, in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, and overall cost of hospitalization. Results Of 212 patients screened, 88 patients were included with 44 patients in each group. Both groups were similar in terms of comorbidities, infection source, and causative microbial. No significant difference was seen in the mean time to optimal antimicrobial therapy (27.3±35.5 hr vs 19.4± 30 hr, p=0.265). Patients in the post-implementation group had a significantly higher mean hospitalization cost ($24,638.87± $11,080.91 vs $32,722.07±$13,076.73, p=0.013). There was no significant difference in time to effective antimicrobial therapy, in-hospital mortality, or length of hospital stay. Conclusion There were no between-group differences in the primary outcome of time to optimal therapy, with a higher mean hospitalization cost after implementation. These results suggest further antimicrobial stewardship interventions are needed, along with larger studies conducted in the community hospital settings. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Biochemical parameters and relation to disease severity in COVID-19 patients

2021 ◽  
pp. 93-96
Keyword(s):  
Biochemical Parameters ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Total Bilirubin ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Sodium Potassium ◽  
Appropriate Treatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Severity Of The Disease

Aim: In this study, we aimed to evaluated whether there is an association between the biochemistry parameters obtained from the first blood test after hospitalization of COVID 19 patients and the prognosis and severity of the disease. Thus, we planned to identify patients with a severe course at an early stage and to help physicians determine the appropriate treatment. Material and Method: The study included 106 COVID 19 patients confirmed by RT-PCR. Patients were categorized into two groups: those admitted to the hospital ward and discharged with recovery (mild cases) and those admitted directly or eventually to the intensive care unit (severe cases). Biochemical parameters of the groups were compared with the Mann Whitney-U Test, as none of the compared parameters fit the normal distribution. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the male-female numbers and ages of the two groups. Statistically significant differences were observed in the length of hospital stay, procalcitonin, hs-troponin I, ferritin, glucose, urea, creatinine, calcium, direct bilirubin, AST, LDH and CRP values (p<0,05). However, no significant difference was found in sodium, potassium, chloride, total bilirubin and ALT tests. Conclusion: The results show that some biochemistry parameters may be used to predict the prognosis of the disease. In particular, procalcitonin, hs troponin I, LDH and CRP values seem to be moderate biomarkers of the prognosis of the disease.

Clinical evaluation of two adult oxygenator systems in terms of mortality and major adverse events

Perfusion ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 026765912110638
Author(s):  
Hüsnü Kamil Limandal ◽  
Mehmet Ali Kayğın ◽  
Servet Ergün ◽  
Taha Özkara ◽  
Mevriye Serpil Diler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Artery Bypass ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Fresh Frozen Plasma ◽  
Wound Complications ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Delayed Sternal Closure ◽  
Fresh Frozen ◽  
Major Adverse Events

Purpose The primary aim of this study was to examine the effects of two oxygenator systems on major adverse events and mortality. Methods A total of 181 consecutive patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting in our clinic were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups according to the oxygenator used: Group M, in which a Medtronic Affinity (Medtronic Operational Headquarters, Minneapolis, MN, USA) oxygenator was used, and Group S, in which a Sorin Inspire (Sorin Group Italia, Mirandola, Italy) oxygenator was used. Results Group S consisted of 89 patients, whereas Group M included 92 patients. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of age ( p = .112), weight ( p = .465), body surface area ( p = .956), or gender ( p = .484). There was no statistically significant difference in hemorrhage on the first or second postoperative day ( p = .318 and p = .455, respectively). No statistically significant differences were observed in terms of red blood cell ( p = .468), fresh frozen plasma ( p = .116), or platelet concentrate transfusion ( p = .212). Infections, wound complications, and delayed sternal closure were significantly more common in Group M ( p = .006, p = .023, and p = .019, respectively). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenators and intra-aortic balloon pumps were required significantly more frequently in Group S ( p = .025 and p = .013, respectively). Major adverse events occurred in 16 (18%) patients in Group S and 14 (15.2%) patients in Group M ( p = .382). Mortality was observed in six (6.7%) patients in Group S and three (3.3%) patients in Group M ( p = .232). No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of length of hospital stay ( p = .451). Conclusion The clinical outcomes of the two oxygenator systems, including mortality, major adverse events, hemorrhage, erythrocyte and platelet transfusions, and length of hospital stay, were similar.

scholarly journals Surviving Burn Injury: Drivers of Length of Hospital Stay

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chimdimma Noelyn Onah ◽  
Richard Allmendinger ◽  
Julia Handl ◽  
Ken W Dunn
Keyword(s):  
Mental Status ◽  
Burn Injury ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Burn Patients ◽  
Effective Care ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Unitary Model ◽  
Hospital Resources

With a reduction in the mortality rate of burn patients, patient length of stay (LOS) is increasingly adopted as an outcome measure. Some studies have attempted to identify factors that explain a burn patient's expected LOS. However, few have investigated the association between LOS and a patient's mental and socioeconomic status. There is anecdotal evidence for links between these factors and uncovering these will aid in better addressing the specific physical and emotional needs of burn patients, and facilitate the planning of scarce hospital resources. Here, we employ machine learning (clustering) and statistical models (regression) to investigate whether a segmentation by socioeconomic/mental status can improve the performance and interpretability of an upstream predictive model, relative to a unitary model derived for the full adult population of patients. Although we found no significant difference in the performance of the unitary model and segment-specific models, the interpretation of the segment-specific models reveals a reduced impact of burn severity in LOS prediction with increasing adverse socioeconomic and mental status. Furthermore, the models for the socioeconomic segments highlight an increased influence of living circumstances and source of injury on LOS. These findings suggest that, in addition to ensuring that the physical needs of patients are met, management of their mental status is crucial for delivering an effective care plan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document