Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(10): 1748-1754, 2022 05 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34370014

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The profound changes wrought by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on routine hospital operations may have influenced performance on hospital measures, including healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). We aimed to evaluate the association between COVID-19 surges and HAI and cluster rates. METHODS: In 148 HCA Healthcare-affiliated hospitals, from 1 March 2020 to 30 September 2020, and a subset of hospitals with microbiology and cluster data through 31 December 2020, we evaluated the association between COVID-19 surges and HAIs, hospital-onset pathogens, and cluster rates using negative binomial mixed models. To account for local variation in COVID-19 pandemic surge timing, we included the number of discharges with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis per staffed bed per month. RESULTS: Central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia increased as COVID-19 burden increased. There were 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 23-108%) more CLABSI, 43% (95% CI: 8-90%) more CAUTI, and 44% (95% CI: 10-88%) more cases of MRSA bacteremia than expected over 7 months based on predicted HAIs had there not been COVID-19 cases. Clostridioides difficile infection was not significantly associated with COVID-19 burden. Microbiology data from 81 of the hospitals corroborated the findings. Notably, rates of hospital-onset bloodstream infections and multidrug resistant organisms, including MRSA, vancomycin-resistant enterococcus, and Gram-negative organisms, were each significantly associated with COVID-19 surges. Finally, clusters of hospital-onset pathogens increased as the COVID-19 burden increased. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 surges adversely impact HAI rates and clusters of infections within hospitals, emphasizing the need for balancing COVID-related demands with routine hospital infection prevention.


Asunto(s)
Bacteriemia , COVID-19 , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Infección Hospitalaria , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador , Infecciones Urinarias , Enterococos Resistentes a la Vancomicina , Bacteriemia/epidemiología , Bacteriemia/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Prueba de COVID-19 , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/prevención & control , Infección Hospitalaria/microbiología , Atención a la Salud , Humanos , Pandemias , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador/microbiología , Infecciones Urinarias/epidemiología
2.
J Hosp Med ; 17(3): 169-175, 2022 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35504528

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Statins are a commonly used class of drugs, and reports have suggested that their use may affect COVID-19 disease severity and mortality risk. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this analysis was to determine the effect of discontinuation of previous atorvastatin therapy in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 on the risk of mortality and ventilation. METHODS: Data from 146,413 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were classified according to statin therapy. Home + in hospital atorvastatin use (continuation of therapy); home + no in hospital atorvastatin use (discontinuation of therapy); no home + no in hospital atorvastatin use (no statins). Logistic regression was performed to assess the association between atorvastatin administration and either mortality or use of mechanical ventilation during the encounter. RESULTS: Continuous use of atorvastatin (home and in hospital) was associated with a 35% reduction in the odds of mortality compared to patients who received atorvastatin at home but not in hospital (odds ratio [OR]: 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.72, p < .001). Similarly, the odds of ventilation were lower with continuous atorvastatin therapy (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.64-0.77, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation of previous atorvastatin therapy is associated with worse outcomes for COVID-19 patients. Providers should consider maintaining existing statin therapy for patients with known or suspected previous use.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas , Atorvastatina/efectos adversos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitales , Humanos , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas/efectos adversos
3.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 202(1): 35.e1-7, 2010 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19889389

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze reasons for postpartum readmission. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a database analysis of readmissions within 6 weeks after delivery during 2007, with extended (180 day) analysis for pneumonia, appendicitis, and cholecystitis. Linear regression analysis, survival curve fitting, and Gehan-Breslow statistic with Holm-Sidak all-pairwise analysis for multiple comparisons were used. Probability values of < .05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Of 222,751 women delivered, 2655 women (1.2%) were readmitted within 6 weeks (0.83% vaginal delivery and 1.8% cesarean section delivery; P < .001). A high percentage of these readmittances occurred within the first 6 weeks: pneumonia (84%), appendicitis (43%), or cholecystitis (46%). Cumulative readmission rates were higher in the first 6 weeks after delivery than in the next 20 weeks (pneumonia curve gradient, 3.7 vs 0.11; appendicitis curve gradient, 1.1 vs 0.36; cholecystitis curve gradient, 6.6 vs 1.7). CONCLUSION: The cause of postpartum readmission is primarily infectious in origin. A recent pregnancy appears to increase the risk of pneumonia, appendicitis, and cholecystitis.


Asunto(s)
Apendicitis/epidemiología , Colecistitis/epidemiología , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía/epidemiología , Trastornos Puerperales/epidemiología , Cesárea/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Periodo Posparto/fisiología , Embarazo
4.
Ann Pharmacother ; 43(11): 1774-80, 2009 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19826097

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Development of hyperglycemia during hospitalization is an area of concern in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Tight glycemic control has been debated for critically ill and noncritically ill patients with hyperglycemia. Although many studies have been performed in the critically ill, adequate data are not available in the noncritically ill population. OBJECTIVE: To compare traditional sliding scale (SS) with a tight glycemic control (TC) algorithm. The primary endpoint was the percentage of total blood glucose measurements in the target range of 80-150 mg/dL. The secondary endpoint evaluated was safety, defined as percentage of all blood glucose measurements that were 0-60 mg/dL. METHODS: A 1-year, retrospective analysis from June 1, 2007, to May 31, 2008, was performed evaluating all inpatients with hyperglycemia within the first 48 hours of admission to the Medical Center of Plano, Plano, TX. A cohort of patients managed with SS (n =121) was compared with those treated with TC (n = 210). Patients on SS insulin received a traditional SS regimen with regular insulin or insulin aspart based on physician preference. RESULTS: Demographics and comorbidities were similar between the 2 groups; however, the TC cohort was younger (64.8 + or - 14.1 vs 70.8 + or - 13.7 y; p < 0.001). There were more persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the TC cohort (81.9%) versus the SS cohort (60.3%; p < 0.001). In the TC cohort, 42.9% of blood glucose measurements were in the target range of 80-150 mg/dL compared with 30.6% of the measurements in the SS cohort (p < 0.001). Regarding safety, 2% of blood glucose measurements of the TC cohort were in the range of 0-60 mg/dL versus 0.3% of the SS cohort (p < 0.001). No clinical sequelae of hypoglycemia were observed. Patients achieved more blood glucose measurements in the target range when treated with TC versus SS insulin, without regard to prior history of diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with TC experienced more blood glucose measurements in the target range as compared with patients treated with SS with relatively low hypoglycemia rates.


Asunto(s)
Glucemia/análisis , Glucemia/metabolismo , Índice Glucémico , Hospitales Comunitarios/normas , Hiperglucemia/sangre , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Índice Glucémico/fisiología , Humanos , Hiperglucemia/diagnóstico , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos
5.
J Patient Saf ; 14(1): 54-59, 2018 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25782561

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The prevention of hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (PrUs) has significant consequences for patient outcomes and the cost of care. Providers are challenged with evaluating available evidence and best practices, then implementing programs and motivating change in various facility environments. METHODS: In a large system of community hospitals, the Reducing Hospital Acquired-PrUs Program was developed to provide a toolkit of best practices, timely and appropriate data for focusing efforts, and continuous implementation support. Baseline data on PrU rates helped focus efforts on the most vulnerable patients and care situations. Facilities were empowered to use and adapt available resources to meet local needs and to share best practices for implementation across the system. Outcomes were measured by the rate of hospital-acquired PrUs, as gathered from patient discharge records. RESULTS: The rate of hospital-acquired stage III and IV PrUs decreased 66.3% between 2011 and 2013. Of the 149 participating facilities, 40 (27%) had zero hospital-acquired stage III and IV PrUs and 77 (52%) had a reduction in their PrU rate. Rates of all PrUs documented as present on admission did not change during this period. A comparison of different strategies used by the most successful facilities illustrated the necessity of facility-level flexibility and recognition of local workflows and patient demographics. CONCLUSIONS: Driven by the combination of a repository of evidence-based tools and best practices, readily available data on PrU rates, and local flexibility with processes, the Reducing Hospital Acquired-PrUs Program represents the successful operationalization of improvement in a wide variety of facilities.


Asunto(s)
Hospitales Comunitarios/normas , Seguridad del Paciente/normas , Úlcera por Presión/prevención & control , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/tendencias , Gestión de Riesgos/métodos , Hospitalización , Hospitales Comunitarios/tendencias , Humanos , Enfermedad Iatrogénica/epidemiología , Enfermedad Iatrogénica/prevención & control , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Seguridad del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Úlcera por Presión/epidemiología , Úlcera por Presión/etiología , Desarrollo de Programa , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Factores de Riesgo , Gestión de Riesgos/organización & administración , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA