Risk Factors of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia Among Hospitalized Patients With Cardiac Diseases.

Background To our knowledge, no studies have been done in Saudi Arabia to determine the risk factors of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) among hospitalized cardiac patients. This study aimed to assess these risk factors. Methods A retrospective study was done at King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Five hundred hospitalized patients diagnosed with pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) were included. A checklist was used to collect data about patients' demographic characteristics; BMI; smoking and alcohol abuse; type of cardiac disease; other chronic diseases; exposure to immunosuppressives; chemotherapy and radiotherapy in the last six months; glucocorticoid use; application of ventilator; initial, follow-up chest X-ray results; pneumonia vaccination status; nasogastric tube use; general anesthesia received; use of loop diuretics; presence of pulmonary diseases; levels of WBC, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP); results of blood and respiratory cultures; number of hospitalizations and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in the last six months; and Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) score. Results The prevalence of pneumonia was 7%. Females; patients with autoimmune diseases who were exposed to immunosuppressives or glucocorticoids; those with an initial or second abnormal chest X-ray; patients who used nasogastric tube, had pulmonary disease, and had high levels of WBC, ESR, or CRP; and patients hospitalized for more than two times had a significantly higher percentage of having pneumonia. Abnormal second chest X-ray, high ESR, and more than two times of hospitalization within the last six months were the risk factors of pneumonia on multivariate logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Better prevention and intervention programs are needed to assess the risk factors of pneumonia among admitted cardiac patients.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Medical Education: A Cross-Sectional Study in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia.

Background: As the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has made a tremendous impact on medical education and healthcare institutions, we aimed to measure effects of online classes on medical students' comprehension in comparison with attending campus classes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A cross-sectional survey has been conducted between September 2020 and June 2021 in the western region of Saudi Arabia. The Convenience sampling technique was conducted to collect the data from medical students in their basic and clinical years, using a questionnaire that involved 45 multiple-choice and multiple-answer questions. Results: Out of 3700 questionnaires, 922 completed the questionnaires from 11 different medical schools. Umm AL-Qura University had the highest response rate with 232 responses (25.2%), followed by King Abdulaziz University with 186 responses (20.2%). The majority of institutions preferred Blackboard and Zoom as platforms for e-learning. A total of 355 (38.5%) believed that it resulted in higher academic achievement, whereas 555 (60.2%) of students believed the limitation of clinical access was one of the biggest disadvantages of e-learning. Overall, 518 (56.2%) of students did not want to continue using e-learning on its own in the future. Whereas 668 (72.5%) wished to keep using e-learning in combination with traditional learning. Conclusion: According to our findings, advantages of e-learning vary among students. Most of the students thought e-learning to be an interactive system that provides a learning opportunity. In contrast, many of the students believed that there were many disadvantages regarding online teaching methods.

Improving first-pass success rates during emergency intubation at an academic emergency department: a quality improvement initiative.

BACKGROUND: Airway management is a high-stakes procedure in emergency medicine. Continuously monitoring this procedure allows performance improvement while revealing safety issues. We instituted a quality improvement initiative in the emergency department to improve first-pass success rates in the emergency department. METHODS: This was a quality improvement initiative at an academic emergency department from 2018 to 2020. We developed a rapid sequence intubation guideline for procedure standardization and introduced an intubation procedure note for performance monitoring. Data were entered directly by the primary physician and nurse during intubation. The quality improvement team thereafter collected the data retrospectively and entered into a local airway database. More importantly, we introduced a culture of quality improvement and safety in airway management via regular education and feedback. RESULTS: We included a total of 146 intubations. The first-pass success rate started at 57.1% and increased to 80.0% during the study period (P < 0.01). Fifty-six percent were male, and the mean age (±SD) was 55.56 (±17.64). Video laryngoscopy was used in 101 (69.2%) patients, while direct laryngoscopy was used in only 44 (30.8%) patients. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the independent factors associated with first-pass success. These factors included the use of video laryngoscopy (odds ratio (OR) 2.47 95% confidence interval (95% CI) [1.62-3.76]) (adjusted OR 3.87 [1.13-13.23]) and good Cormack-Lehane views (grades 1-2) (OR 2.71 95% CI [1.74-4.20]) (adjusted OR 7.88 [2.43-25.53]). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that implementing and maintaining an airway quality improvement program improves first-pass intubation success. Moreover, the use of video laryngoscopy and obtaining good Cormack-Lehane views (grades 1-2) are independently associated with improved first-pass success.