Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
South Med J ; 117(3): 165-171, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38428939

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders are used to express patient preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This study examined whether early DNR orders are associated with differences in treatments and outcomes among patients hospitalized with pneumonia. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 768,015 adult patients hospitalized with pneumonia from 2010 to 2015 in 646 US hospitals. The exposure was DNR orders present on admission. Secondary analyses stratified patients by predicted in-hospital mortality. Main outcomes included in-hospital mortality, length of stay, cost, intensive care admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, noninvasive ventilation, vasopressors, and dialysis initiation. RESULTS: Of 768,015 patients, 94,155 (12.3%) had an early DNR order. Compared with those without, patients with DNR orders were older (mean age 80.1 ± 10.6 years vs 67.8 ± 16.4 years), with higher comorbidity burden, intensive care use (31.6% vs 30.6%), and in-hospital mortality (28.2% vs 8.5%). After adjustment via propensity score weighting, these patients had higher mortality (odds ratio [OR] 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.33-2.45) and lower use of intensive therapies such as vasopressors (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.81-0.85) and invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.66-0.70). Although there was little relationship between predicted mortality and DNR orders, among those with highest predicted mortality, DNR orders were associated with lower intensive care use compared with those without (66.7% vs 80.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with early DNR orders have higher in-hospital mortality rates than those without, but often receive intensive care. These orders have the most impact on the care of patients with the highest mortality risk.


Assuntos
Pneumonia , Ordens quanto à Conduta (Ética Médica) , Adulto , Humanos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos Retrospectivos , Hospitalização , Comorbidade , Pneumonia/terapia
2.
Antibiotics (Basel) ; 13(2)2024 Jan 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38391509

RESUMO

Bloodstream infections (BSIs) arising in the intensive care unit (ICUs) present a significant challenge and we completed a narrative review of the emerging literature on this issue. Multiple reports document that these infections are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Also, they can be caused by a variety of pathogens. Generally classified as either community or hospital in onset, or as either primary or secondary in origin, the microbiology of ICU BSIs varies across the globe. Gram-positive pathogens predominate in certain regions such as the United States while Gram-negative organisms occur more frequently in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. The incidence of ICU BSIs climbed during the recent pandemic. BSIs complicating the care of persons suffering from Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection significantly heighten the risk for death compared to patients who develop ICU BSIs but who are not infected with SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, rates of antimicrobial resistance are generally increasing in ICU BSIs. This fact complicates attempts to ensure that the patient receives initially appropriate antimicrobial therapy and is of particular concern in Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, and Acinetobacter baumannii. Fortunately, with respect to clinical application, preventive measures exist, and recent analyses suggest that increased collaboration between infectious disease specialists and intensivists can improve patient outcomes.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA