RESUMEN
Background: Inpatient hyperglycaemia is common and associated with poor outcomes such as increased mortality and prolonged hospital stay. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of inpatient hyperglycaemia and glycaemic control in Putrajaya Hospital, Malaysia. Secondary objectives were to compare the length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission rate, and death between controlled and uncontrolled glycaemic groups. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted between 1 July and 31 December 2019 among patients in medical wards who had a blood glucose (BG) level of > 7.8 mmol/L and stayed in the wards for ≥ 24 h. We retrieved information on demographics, diabetes history and BG profiles. The definition of controlled glycaemic status is when ≥ 80% of BG readings were between 4.0 mmol/L and 10.0 mmol/L during the hospital stay. Results: The prevalence of inpatient hyperglycaemia was 55.2%. There were 841 patients who met the eligibility criteria; their mean age was 60 (13.8) years old. Most (79.4%) of the patients were Malay and 53.9% were male. There were 452 (53.7%) patients in the uncontrolled group. They were younger and admitted with more kidney complications compared to those in the controlled group. The median LOS for both groups was 3 (2) days. The uncontrolled group showed a higher percentage of readmission within 30 days (7.5% versus 4.6 %) and death during admission (3.3% versus 1.6 %) (P = 0.100 and P = 0.082). Conclusion: The prevalence of inpatient hyperglycaemia was high. More than half of them had uncontrolled BG. Both groups had a similar average length of stay. The 30-day readmission rate and death during admission were higher in the uncontrolled group, although statistically not significant.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Rapid deployment of COVID-19 vaccines is challenging for safety surveillance, especially on adverse events of special interest (AESIs) that were not identified during the pre-licensure studies. This study evaluated the risk of hospitalisations for predefined diagnoses among the vaccinated population in Malaysia. METHODS: Hospital admissions for selected diagnoses between 1 February 2021 and 30 September 2021 were linked to the national COVID-19 immunisation register. We conducted self-controlled case-series study by identifying individuals who received COVID-19 vaccine and diagnosis of thrombocytopenia, venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, myocarditis/pericarditis, arrhythmia, stroke, Bell's Palsy, and convulsion/seizure. The incidence of events was assessed in risk period of 21 days postvaccination relative to the control period. We used conditional Poisson regression to calculate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) with adjustment for calendar period. RESULTS: There was no increase in the risk for myocarditis/pericarditis, Bell's Palsy, stroke, and myocardial infarction in the 21 days following either dose of BNT162b2, CoronaVac, and ChAdOx1 vaccines. A small increased risk of venous thromboembolism (IRR 1.24; 95% CI 1.02, 1.49), arrhythmia (IRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07, 1.26), and convulsion/seizure (IRR 1.26; 95% CI 1.07, 1.48) was observed among BNT162b2 recipients. No association between CoronaVac vaccine was found with all events except arrhythmia (IRR 1.15; 95% CI 1.01, 1.30). ChAdOx1 vaccine was associated with an increased risk of thrombocytopenia (IRR 2.67; 95% CI 1.21, 5.89) and venous thromboembolism (IRR 2.22; 95% CI 1.17, 4.21). CONCLUSION: This study shows acceptable safety profiles of COVID-19 vaccines among recipients of BNT162b2, CoronaVac, and ChAdOx1 vaccines. This information can be used together with effectiveness data for risk-benefit analysis of the vaccination program. Further surveillance with more data is required to assess AESIs following COVID-19 vaccination in short- and long-term.
