RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In this prospective, observational study, we aimed to investigate epidemiologic and microbial trends of infective endocarditis in western Norway. METHODS: Clinical and microbiological characteristics of 497 cases of infective endocarditis from 2016 through 2022 were investigated. Categorical data were analysed using Chi-squared tests. Survival data were analysed using multiple Cox regression and reported using hazard ratios. RESULTS: The mean age was 67 years, and 74% were men. The annual incidence rates varied from 10.4 to 14.1 per 100,000 inhabitants per year. Infective endocarditis on native valves was observed in 257 (52%) of the cases, whereas infective endocarditis on prosthetic valves and/or cardiac implantable electronic devices was observed in 240 (48%) of the cases: infection on surgically implanted bioprostheses was observed in 124 (25%) of the patients, infection on transcatheter aortic valve implantation was observed in 47 (10%) patients, and infection on mechanical valves was observed in 34 (7%) cases. Infection related to cardiac implantable electronic devices was observed in a total of 50 (10%) cases. Staphylococcus aureus and viridans streptococci were the most common microbial causes, and isolated in 145 (29%) and 130 (26%) of the cases, respectively. Enterococcal endocarditis showed a rising trend during the study period and constituted 90 (18%) of our total cases of infective endocarditis, and 67%, 47%, and 26% of the cases associated with prosthetic material, transcatheter aortic valve implantation and cardiac implantable electronic devices, respectively. There was no significant difference in 90-day mortality rates between the native valve endocarditis group (12%) and the group with infective endocarditis on prosthetic valves or cardiac implants (14%), p = 0.522. In a model with gender, age, people who inject drugs, microbiology and type of valve affected, only advanced age was significantly associated with fatal outcome within 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of infective endocarditis, and particularly enterococcal endocarditis, increased during the study period. Enterococci appeared to have a particular affinity for prosthetic cardiac material. Advanced age was the only independent risk factor for death within 90 days.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis , Humanos , Masculino , Noruega/epidemiología , Femenino , Anciano , Estudios Prospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/epidemiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/microbiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/mortalidad , Incidencia , Endocarditis/epidemiología , Endocarditis/microbiología , Endocarditis/mortalidad , Prótesis Valvulares Cardíacas/efectos adversos , Prótesis Valvulares Cardíacas/microbiología , Endocarditis Bacteriana/epidemiología , Endocarditis Bacteriana/microbiología , Endocarditis Bacteriana/mortalidad , Adulto , Staphylococcus aureus/aislamiento & purificaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Transferring residents from nursing homes (NHs) to emergency care facilities (ECFs) is often questioned as many are terminally ill and have access to onsite care. While some NH to ECF transfers have merit, avoiding other transfers may benefit residents and reduce healthcare system costs and provider burden. Despite many years of research in this area, differentiating warranted (i.e., appropriate) from unwarranted NH to ECF transfers remains challenging. In this article, we report consensus on warranted and unwarranted NH to ECF transfers scenarios. METHODS: A Delphi study was used to identify consensus regarding warranted and unwarranted NH to ECF transfers. Delphi participants included nurses (RNs) and medical doctors (MDs) from NHs, out-of-hours primary care clinics (OOHs), and hospital-based emergency departments. A list of 12 scenarios and 11 medical conditions was generated from the existing literature on causes and medical conditions leading to transfers, and pilot tested and refined prior to conducting the study. Three Delphi rounds were conducted, and data were analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistics. RESULTS: Seventy-nine experts consented to participate, of whom 56 (71%) completed all three Delphi rounds. Participants reached high or very high consensus on when to not transfer residents, except for scenarios regarding delirium, where only moderate consensus was attained. Conversely, except when pain relieving surgery was required, participants reached low agreement on scenarios depicting warranted NH to ECF transfers. Consensus opinions differ significantly between health professionals, participant gender, and rurality, for seven of the 23 transfer scenarios and medical conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Transfers from nursing homes to emergency care facilities can be defined as warranted, discretionary, and unwarranted. These categories are based on the areas of consensus found in this Delphi study and are intended to operationalize the terms warranted and unwarranted transfers between nursing homes and emergency care facilities.