scholarly journals Incidence and Practice of Early Prone Positioning in Invasively Ventilated COVID-19 Patients—Insights from the PRoVENT-COVID Observational Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (20) ◽  
pp. 4783
Author(s):  
Willemke Stilma ◽  
David M. P. van Meenen ◽  
Christel M. A. Valk ◽  
Hendrik de Bruin ◽  
Frederique Paulus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Prone Positioning ◽  
Multicenter Observational Study ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Actual Use ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

We describe the incidence and practice of prone positioning and determined the association of use of prone positioning with outcomes in invasively ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a national, multicenter observational study, performed at 22 intensive care units in the Netherlands. Patients were categorized into 4 groups, based on indication for and actual use of prone positioning. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were 90-day mortality, and ICU and hospital length of stay. In 734 patients, prone positioning was indicated in 60%—the incidence of prone positioning was higher in patients with an indication than in patients without an indication for prone positioning (77 vs. 48%, p = 0.001). Patients were left in the prone position for median 15.0 (10.5–21.0) hours per full calendar day—the duration was longer in patients with an indication than in patients without an indication for prone positioning (16.0 (11.0–23.0) vs. 14.0 (10.0–19.0) hours, p < 0.001). Ventilator settings and ventilation parameters were not different between the four groups, except for FiO2 which was higher in patients having an indication for and actually receiving prone positioning. Our data showed no difference in mortality at day 28 between the 4 groups (HR no indication, no prone vs. no indication, prone vs. indication, no prone vs. indication, prone: 1.05 (0.76–1.45) vs. 0.88 (0.62–1.26) vs. 1.15 (0.80–1.54) vs. 0.96 (0.73–1.26) (p = 0.08)). Factors associated with the use of prone positioning were ARDS severity and FiO2. The findings of this study are that prone positioning is often used in COVID-19 patients, even in patients that have no indication for this intervention. Sessions of prone positioning lasted long. Use of prone positioning may affect outcomes.

scholarly journals Effects of Methylprednisolone on Ventilator-Free Days in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed Badr ◽  
Bruno De Oliveira ◽  
Khaled Abdallah ◽  
Ashraf Nadeem ◽  
Yeldho Varghese ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Competing Risks ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay

Objectives: There are limited data regarding the efficacy of methylprednisolone in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. We aimed to determine whether methylprednisolone increases the number of ventilator-free days (VFDs) among these patients. Design: Retrospective single-center study Setting: Intensive care unit Patients: All patients with ARDS due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation between 1 March and 29 May 2020 were included Interventions: None Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days (VFDs) during the first 28 days, defined as being alive and free from mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was analyzed with competing-risks regression based on Fine and Gray&rsquo;s proportional subhazards model. Death before day 28 was considered to be the competing event. A total of 77 patients met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-two patients (41.6%) received methylprednisolone. The median dose was 1 mg.kg-1 (IQR: 1-1.3 mg.kg-1) and median duration of 5 days (IQR:5-7 days). Patients who received methylprednisolone had a mean 18.8 VFDs (95% CI, 16.6-20.9) during the first 28 days vs. 14.2 VFDs (95% CI, 12.6-16.7) in patients who did not receive methylprednisolone (difference, 4.61; 95% CI, 1.10-8.12; P = 0.001). In the multivariable competing-risks regression analysis and after adjusting for potential confounders (ventilator settings, prone position, organ failure support, severity of the disease, tocilizumab, and inflammatory markers), methylprednisolone was independently associated with a higher number of VFDs (subhazards ratio: 0.10, 95%CI: 0.02-0.45; p=0.003). Hospital mortality did not differ between the two groups (31.2% vs. 28.9%, p=0.82). Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the methylprednisolone group (24 days [IQR:15-41 days] vs. 37 days [IQR:23-52 days], p=0.046). The incidence of positive blood cultures was higher in patients who received methylprednisolone (37.5% vs. 17.8%, p=0.052). However, 91% of patients who received methylprednisolone also received tocilizumab. The number of days with hyperglycemia was similar in the two groups. Conclusions: Methylprednisolone was independently associated with increased VFDs and shortened hospital length of stay. The combination of methylprednisolone and tocilizumab was associated with a higher rate of positive blood cultures. Further trials are needed to evaluate the benefits and safety of methylprednisolone in moderate or severe COVID-19 ARDS.

scholarly journals Rate of Antibiotic Use and Associated Risk Factors in COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alysa J. Martin ◽  
Stephanie Shulder ◽  
David Dobrzynski ◽  
Katelyn Quartuccio ◽  
Kelly E. Pillinger
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Associated Risk Factors

AbstractBackgroundLiterature suggests that antibiotic prescribing in COVID-19 patients is high, despite low rates of confirmed bacterial infection. There are little data on what drives prescribing habits.ObjectiveThis study sought to determine antibiotic prescribing rates and risk factors for antibiotic prescribing in hospitalized patients. It was the first study to assess risk factors for receiving more than one course of antibiotics.MethodsThis was a retrospective, multi-center, observational study. Patients admitted from March 1, 2020 to May 31, 2020 and treated for PCR-confirmed COVID-19 were included. The primary endpoint was the rate of antibiotic use during hospitalization. Secondary endpoints included risk factors associated with antibiotic use, risk factors associated with receiving more than one antibiotic course, and rate of microbiologically confirmed infections.ResultsA total of 208 encounters (198 patients) were included in the final analysis. Eighty-three percent of patients received at least one course of antibiotics, despite low rates of microbiologically confirmed infection (12%). Almost one-third of patients (30%) received more than one course of antibiotics. Risk factors identified for both antibiotic prescribing and receiving more than one course of antibiotics were more serious illness, increased hospital length of stay, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and acute respiratory distress syndrome.Conclusion and relevanceThere were high rates of antibiotic prescribing with low rates of bacterial co-infection. Many patients received more than one course of antibiotics during hospitalization. This study highlights the need for increased antibiotic stewardship practices in COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals Effects of Methylprednisolone on Ventilator-Free Days in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and COVID-19: A Retrospective Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 760
Author(s):  
Mohamed Badr ◽  
Bruno De Oliveira ◽  
Khaled Abdallah ◽  
Ashraf Nadeem ◽  
Yeldho Varghese ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Competing Risks ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay

Objectives: There are limited data regarding the efficacy of methylprednisolone in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. We aimed to determine whether methylprednisolone is associated with increases in the number of ventilator-free days (VFDs) among these patients. Design: Retrospective single-center study. Setting: Intensive care unit. Patients: All patients with ARDS due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation between 1 March and 29 May 2020 were included. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days (VFDs) for the first 28 days. Defined as being alive and free from mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was analyzed with competing-risks regression based on Fine and Gray’s proportional sub hazards model. Death before day 28 was considered to be the competing event. A total of 77 patients met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-two patients (41.6%) received methylprednisolone. The median dose was 1 mg·kg−1 (IQR: 1–1.3 mg·kg−1) and median duration for 5 days (IQR: 5–7 days). Patients who received methylprednisolone had a mean 18.8 VFDs (95% CI, 16.6–20.9) during the first 28 days vs. 14.2 VFDs (95% CI, 12.6–16.7) in patients who did not receive methylprednisolone (difference, 4.61, 95% CI, 1.10–8.12, p = 0.001). In the multivariable competing-risks regression analysis and after adjusting for potential confounders (ventilator settings, prone position, organ failure support, severity of the disease, tocilizumab, and inflammatory markers), methylprednisolone was independently associated with a higher number of VFDs (subhazards ratio: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.02–0.45, p = 0.003). Hospital mortality did not differ between the two groups (31.2% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.82). Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the methylprednisolone group (24 days [IQR: 15–41 days] vs. 37 days [IQR: 23–52 days], p = 0.046). The incidence of positive blood cultures was higher in patients who received methylprednisolone (37.5% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.052). However, 81% of patients who received methylprednisolone also received tocilizumab. The number of days with hyperglycemia was similar in the two groups. Conclusions: Methylprednisolone was independently associated with increased VFDs and shortened hospital length of stay. The combination of methylprednisolone and tocilizumab was associated with a higher rate of positive blood cultures. Further trials are needed to evaluate the benefits and safety of methylprednisolone in moderate or severe COVID-19 ARDS.

scholarly journals Factors Associated with Prolonged Hospital Length of Stay in Adults with Imported Falciparum Malaria—An Observational Study from a Tertiary Care University Hospital in Berlin, Germany

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 1941
Author(s):  
Bodo Hoffmeister
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Falciparum Malaria ◽  
Early Recognition ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Oedema ◽  
Factors Associated

Outcome of falciparum malaria is largely influenced by the standard of care provided, which in turn depends on the available medical resources. Worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on the availability of these resources, even in resource-rich healthcare systems such as Germany’s. The present study aimed to determine the under-explored factors associated with hospital length of stay (LOS) in imported falciparum malaria to identify potential targets for improving management. This retrospective observational study used multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression with time to discharge as an endpoint for adults hospitalized between 2001 and 2015 with imported falciparum malaria in the Charité University Hospital, Berlin. The median LOS of the 535 cases enrolled was 3 days (inter-quartile range, IQR, 3–4 days). The likelihood of being discharged by day 3 strongly decreased with severe malaria (hazard ratio, HR, 0.274; 95% Confidence interval, 95%CI: 0.190–0.396) and by 40% with each additional presenting complication (HR, 0.595; 95%CI: 0.510–0.694). The 55 (10.3%) severe cases required a median LOS of 7 days (IQR, 5–12 days). In multivariate analysis, occurrence of shock (adjusted HR, aHR, 0.438; 95%CI 0.220–0.873), acute pulmonary oedema or acute respiratory distress syndrome (aHR, 0.450; 95%CI: 0.223–0.874), and the need for renal replacement therapy (aHR, 0.170; 95%CI: 0.063–0.461) were independently associated with LOS. All patients survived to discharge. This study illustrates that favourable outcomes can be achieved with high-standard care in imported falciparum malaria. Early recognition of disease severity together with targeted supportive care can lead to avoidance of manifest organ failure, thereby potentially decreasing LOS and alleviating pressure on bed capacities.

scholarly journals 562. Tocilizumab for the Treatment of Severe COVID-19: A Retrospective, Multi-Center, Case-Matched Series

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S346-S346
Author(s):  
Sarah Norman ◽  
Sara Jones ◽  
David Reeves ◽  
Christian Cheatham
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Fungal Infections ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Matched Design ◽  
Median Hospital

Abstract Background At the time of this writing, there is no FDA approved medication for the treatment of COVID-19. One medication currently under investigation for COVID-19 treatment is tocilizumab, an interleukin-6 (IL-6) inhibitor. It has been shown there are increased levels of cytokines including IL-6 in severe COVID-19 hospitalized patients attributed to cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Therefore, inhibition of IL-6 receptors may lead to a reduction in cytokines and prevent progression of CRS. The purpose of this retrospective study is to utilize a case-matched design to investigate clinical outcomes associated with the use of tocilizumab in severe COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Methods This was a retrospective, multi-center, case-matched series matched 1:1 on age, BMI, and days since symptom onset. Inclusion criteria included ≥ 18 years of age, laboratory confirmed positive SARS-CoV-2 result, admitted to a community hospital from March 1st – May 8th, 2020, and received tocilizumab while admitted. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, total mechanical ventilation days, mechanical ventilation mortality, and incidence of secondary bacterial or fungal infections. Results The following results are presented as tocilizumab vs control respectively. The primary outcome of in-hospital mortality for tocilizumab (n=26) vs control (n=26) was 10 (38%) vs 11 (42%) patients, p=0.777. The median hospital length of stay for tocilizumab vs control was 14 vs 11 days, p=0.275. The median days of mechanical ventilation for tocilizumab (n=21) vs control (n=15) was 8 vs 7 days, p=0.139, and the mechanical ventilation mortality was 10 (48%) vs 9 (60%) patients, p=0.463. In the tocilizumab group, for those expired (n=10) vs alive (n=16), 10 (100%) vs 7 (50%) patients respectively had a peak ferritin &gt; 600 ng/mL, and 6 (60%) vs 8 (50%) patients had a peak D-dimer &gt; 2,000 ng/mL. The incidence of secondary bacterial or fungal infections within 7 days of tocilizumab administration occurred in 5 (19%) patients. Conclusion These findings suggest that tocilizumab may be a beneficial treatment modality for severe COVID-19 patients. Larger, prospective, placebo-controlled trials are needed to further validate results. Disclosures Christian Cheatham, PharmD, BCIDP, Antimicrobial Resistance Solutions (Shareholder)

scholarly journals Cardiac Injuries at Estonian Major Trauma Facilities: A 23-year Perspective

2018 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Einberg ◽  
S. Saar ◽  
A. Seljanko ◽  
A. Lomp ◽  
U. Lepner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Alcohol Intoxication ◽  
Cardiac Injury ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Cardiac Trauma ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Overall Mortality

Background and Aims: Cardiac injuries are highly lethal lesions following trauma and most of the patients decease in pre-hospital settings. However, studies on cardiac trauma in Estonia are scarce. Thus, we set out to study cardiac injuries admitted to Estonian major trauma facilities during 23 years of Estonian independence. Materials and Methods: After the ethics review board approval, all consecutive patients with cardiac injuries per ICD-9 (861.0 and 861.1) and ICD-10 codes (S.26) admitted to the major trauma facilities between 1 January 1993 and 31 July 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Cardiac contusions were excluded. Data collected included demographics, injury profile, and in-hospital outcomes. Primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiac injury profile and hospital length of stay. Results: During the study period, 37 patients were included. Mean age was 33.1 ± 12.0 years and 92% were male. Penetrating and blunt trauma accounted for 89% and 11% of the cases, respectively. Thoracotomy and sternotomy rates for cardiac repair were 80% and 20%, respectively. Most frequently injured cardiac chamber was left ventricle at 49% followed by right ventricle, right atrium, and left atrium at 34%, 17%, and 3% of the patients, respectively. Multi-chamber injury was observed at 5% of the cases. Overall hospital length of stay was 13.5 ± 16.7 days. Overall mortality was 22% (n = 8) with uniformly fatal outcomes following left atrial and multi-chamber injuries. Conclusion: Overall, 37 patients with cardiac injuries were hospitalized to national major trauma facilities during the 23-year study period. The overall in-hospital mortality was 22% comparing favorably with previous reports. Risk factors for mortality were initial Glasgow Coma Scale < 9, pre-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and alcohol intoxication.

Nursing Diagnoses as Predictors of Hospital Length of Stay: A Prospective Observational Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio D'Agostino ◽  
Ercole Vellone ◽  
Antonello Cocchieri ◽  
John Welton ◽  
Massimo Maurici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Nursing Diagnoses

scholarly journals Intravenous versus Oral Step-Down for the Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia in a Pediatric Population

Pharmacy ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Sarah Grace Gunter ◽  
Mary Joyce B. Wingler ◽  
David A. Cretella ◽  
Jamie L. Wagner ◽  
Katie E. Barber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Pediatric Population ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Limited Data ◽  
Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteremia ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Step Down

Limited data are available regarding optimal antimicrobial therapy for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) in pediatric patients. The purpose of this study was to assess clinical characteristics and outcomes associated with intravenous (IV) versus oral step-down treatment of pediatric SAB. This study evaluated patients aged 3 months to 18 years that received at least 72 h of inpatient treatment for SAB. The primary endpoint was 30-day readmission. Secondary endpoints included hospital length of stay and inpatient mortality. One hundred and one patients were included in this study. The median age was 7.9 years. Patients who underwent oral step-down were less likely to be immunocompromised and more likely to have community-acquired SAB from osteomyelitis or skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI). More patients in the IV therapy group had a 30-day readmission (10 (25.6%) vs. 3 (5.3%), p = 0.006). Mortality was low (5 (5%)) and not statistically different between groups. Length of stay was greater in patients receiving IV therapy only (11 vs. 7 days, p = 0.001). In this study, over half of the patients received oral step-down therapy and 30-day readmission was low for this group. Oral therapy appears to be safe and effective for patients with SAB from osteomyelitis or SSTIs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document