Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 11(1)2024 May 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38719502

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be a global threat to public health, with over 766 million confirmed cases and more than 6 million reported deaths. Patients with a smoking history are at a greater risk of severe respiratory complications and death due to COVID-19. This study investigated the association between smoking history and adverse clinical outcomes among COVID-19 patients admitted to a designated medical centre in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted using patient chart review data from a large tertiary medical centre in the eastern region of the country. Patients admitted between January and December 2020 were screened. The inclusion criteria were ≥18 years of age and confirmed COVID-19 infection via reverse-transcription-PCR. The exclusion criteria were unconfirmed COVID-19 infection, non-COVID-19 admissions, unconfirmed smoking status, vaccinated individuals, essential chart information missing or refusal to consent. Statistical analyses comprised crude estimates, matching weights (as the main analysis) and directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) causal pathway analysis using an ordinal regression model. RESULTS: The sample comprised 447 patients (never-smoker=321; ever-smoker=126). The median age (IQR) was 50 years (39-58), and 73.4% of the sample were males. A matching weights procedure was employed to ensure covariate balance. The analysis revealed that the odds of developing severe COVID-19 were higher in the ever-smoker group with an OR of 1.44 (95% CI 0.90 to 2.32, p=0.130). This was primarily due to an increase in non-invasive oxygen therapy with an OR of 1.05 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.10, p=0.101). The findings were consistent across the different analytical methods employed, including crude estimates and DAGs causal pathway analysis. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that smoking may increase the risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes. However, the study was limited by its retrospective design and small sample size. Further research is therefore needed to confirm the findings.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Pontuação de Propensão , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Feminino , Arábia Saudita/epidemiologia , Adulto , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Fumar Tabaco/epidemiologia , Fumar Tabaco/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Fatores de Risco , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos
2.
Clin Infect Pract ; 19: 100229, 2023 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37168925

RESUMO

Objectives: To determine the association between common comorbidities, ICU mortality and antimicrobial consumption among critically ill COVID 19 patients in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A retrospective observational study of patients admitted to the ICU from March 1st, 2020, through August 31st, 2021. We excluded patients who stayed <24 h in the ICU and with no confirmed COVID-19 PCR testing. Results: Of the 976 screened ICU patients, 848 were included. While there was no difference in mortality between patients with and without comorbidities, those with at least one comorbidity had a higher severity of illness (p = 0.013). Compared to survivors, non-survivors were more likely to require mechanical ventilation and vasopressor support (P < 0.001). Almost all patients received at least one antimicrobial therapy. Predictors independently associated with ICU mortality were: older age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.04), vancomycin use (AOR, 2.69; 95% [CI], 1.65-4.37), linezolid use (AOR, 2.65; 95% [CI], 1.65-4.04), sepsis or septic shock (AOR, 6.39; 95% [CI], 3.68-11.08), Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) (AOR, 2.51; 95% [CI], 1.61-3.92) and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) (AOR, 2.03; 95% [CI], 1.61-3.92). Conclusion: Older age, vancomycin and linezolid use, sepsis/septic shock, AKI, and ARDS were negative prognostic factors in critically ill COVID-19 patients. More studies are needed to evaluate the outcomes of survived critically ill patients in relation to their vaccination status.

3.
Ann Pharmacother ; 57(4): 361-374, 2023 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35942505

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients are at risk of thrombosis. Literature that compares the effectiveness of enoxaparin to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in COVID-19 patients is scarce. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of enoxaparin compared with UFH when used at their standard/intermediate dosing in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective study conducted at a large COVID-19 center located in Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia. Confirmed COVID-19 cases (≥18 years old) admitted between January and December 2020 were randomly screened for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation, on chronic anticoagulation, had active bleeding, a platelet count <25 × 109/L, or an incomplete electronic file. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of any thrombotic event (pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, stroke, or myocardial infarction) or mortality. Secondary endpoints were major or minor bleeding. We applied inverse propensity score weighting (IPTW) with survival analysis to analyze the primary endpoint. Logistic regression was used for the secondary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 980 patients were included (enoxaparin, n = 470 and UFH, n = 510) with a mean age (±SD) of 47.7 (± 12.3) for the enoxaparin arm and 52 (±13.9) for the UFH arm. There was a statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint with an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 0.46 (95%CI: 0.22 to 0.96, P = 0.039) in favor of the enoxaparin arm. There was no statistically significant difference in major or minor bleeding rates between the two arms. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: When compared with UFH, enoxaparin was associated with a significant reduction in thrombotic events or mortality among COVID-19 patients. The results need confirmation from randomized controlled trials.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Enoxaparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso
4.
Cureus ; 14(6): e25865, 2022 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35836444

RESUMO

Background Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) are frequently prescribed for contraception, to regulate ovulation and treat endometriosis, and to control menopausal symptoms. A major risk of hormonal contraceptives is vascular thrombosis. Methods A retrospective chart review of female patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), or other sites of thrombosis or emboli seen in the thrombosis clinic of the department of internal medicine at a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia between March 2010 and February 2015 was performed to identify and characterize which women were taking COCs. Results Of 1,008 patients treated for DVT, PE, or other sites of thrombosis or emboli, 100 (9.9%) were taking COCs. Venous (98%) and arterial (2%) thromboses were seen. Overall, 62% of the patients experienced a DVT and 26% pulmonary emboli, and 20% of the patients experienced unusual sites of thrombosis. Furthermore, 53% were obese or morbidly obese. The incidence of venous thrombosis was the highest during the first year of COC use (73%). Of the patients, 8% had thrombophilia. Conclusion This study characterizes Saudi women with thrombotic events taking COCs and identifies risk factors, including unusual sites of thrombosis. Most patients experienced the vascular event during the first year of taking COCs. Age of 40-50 years, obesity, and thrombophilia were the commonly observed risk factors.

5.
Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther ; 20(7): 1037-1047, 2022 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35209783

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of tocilizumab in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from nasopharyngeal swab, and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation during admission. Survival analyses with inverse propensity score treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were conducted. To account for immortal bias, we used Cox proportional modeling with time-dependent covariance. Competing risk analysis was performed for the extubation endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 556 (tocilizumab = 193, control = 363) patients were included. Males constituted the majority of the participants (69.2% in tocilizumab arm,74.1% in control arm). Tocilizumab was not associated with a reduction in mortality with hazard ratio [(HR) = 0.82,95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.62-1.10] in the Inverse propensity score weighting (IPTW) analysis and (HR = 0.86,95% CI: 0.64-1.16) in the PSM analysis. However, tocilizumab was associated with an increased rate of extubation (33.6%) compared to the control arm (11.9%); subdistributional hazards (SHR) = 3.1, 95% CI: 1.86-5.16). CONCLUSIONS: Although tocilizumab was not found to be effective in reducing mortality, extubation rate while on mechanical ventilation was higher among tocilizumab treated group.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Respiração Artificial , Adulto , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2
6.
J Res Pharm Pract ; 9(1): 36-43, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32489959

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to investigate the frequency and reasons for missing doses and impact of a pharmacist-led intervention to reduce the missed doses in intensive care units. METHODS: This study was completed in two phases. In the first phase, a retrospective quality assurance audit was conducted to quantify the problem of missed doses from the pharmacist/nurse communication slip record. The frequency and potential reasons for missing dose occurrences were identified and listed, and respective solutions were finalized by a joint health-care team. In the second phase of the study, post-intervention analysis was done for a period of 1 month to check the impact of intervention. The data were recorded from pharmacy/nursing communication forms for medication, dosage form, route of administration (ROA), frequency of missed doses, and underlying reasons for missing doses. FINDINGS: There was a substantial reduction in the number of incidences of missed doses in post-intervention phase. The number of events decreased from 190 (pre-intervention; 2 months) to 11 (post-intervention; 1 month), 389 to 87, and 133 to 12 for automatic stop order, unknown reason, and late mix medication, respectively. No missed dose event was recorded secondary to order overseen and inactive patient status in post-intervention phase. Moreover, identified reasons, ROA, frequency, and the system status were the significant predictors of missing doses. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study emphasized the need to introduce better documentation procedures and continuous surveillance system to decrease the number of missing doses and further improve already established drug distribution service.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA