The clinical characteristics and the risk factors for mortality in Non-COVID-19 critical patients in a pandemic hospital in Turkey: a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disrupted standard health policies and routine medical care, and thus, the management and treatment pathways of many clinical conditions have changed as never before. The negative impact of the pandemic rendered the systemic disease more complicated and accelerated mortality. For the last two years, clinicians have primarily focused on COVID-19 patients; however, the non-COVID-19 critically ill patients needed to be addressed from multiple perspectives. This study investigated the demographic and clinical characteristics of non-COVID-19 critical care patients admitted concurrently with a COVID-19 wave. The objective of this study was to identify the risk factors for mortality in critically ill non-COVID-19 patients. Methods: All consecutive cases admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) were included in the study between January 1, 2021 and July 14, 2021. All data, including age, gender, admission characteristics, patient dependency, pre-existing systemic diseases, the severity of illness (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation -APACHE-II), predicted death rate in ICU, life-sustaining medical procedures on admission or during ICU stay, length of stay, and admission time to the ICU, were obtained from the hospital's electronic database. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was assessed for all patients. Results: A total of 192 patients were screened during the study period. Mortality was significantly increased in non-surgical patients, previously dependent patients, patients requiring mechanical ventilation, continuous renal replacement therapy, and patients requiring the infusion of vasoactive medications. The number of pre-existing diseases and the admission time had no impact on mortality. The mean CCI was significantly higher in non-survivors but was not a strong predictor of mortality as APACHE II. Conclusions: In this retrospective study, the severity of illness and the need for vasoactive agent infusion were significantly higher in non-survivors confirmed by multivariate analysis as predictive factors for mortality in critical non-COVID-19 patients.

Efficiency of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine for supraclavicular block: a randomized double-blind comparative study / Eficiência de levobupivacaína e bupivacaína para bloqueio supraclavicular: estudo comparativo, duplo-cego e randomizado / Eficiencia de la levobupivacaína y la bupivacaína para el bloqueo supraclavicular: estudio comparativo, doble ciego y aleatorizado

Background and objectives: Success rate of catheter applications is low in supraclavicular block. Thus, bupivacaine and levobupivacaine become important with their long effect time in single injection practices. In this study, we aimed to compare the effectiveness, side effects and complications of bupivacaine and levobupivacaine in supraclavicular block. Methods: Sixty patients aged between 20 and 65, with body weight between 50 and 100 kg, in the ASA I-II-III group who were scheduled for hand, forearm and arm surgery using supraclavicular block were randomized into two groups of 30. The patients received 30 ml 0.5% bupivacaine (Group B) or 30 ml 0.5% levobupivacaine (Group L). Motor and sensory blocks were evaluated. Motor and sensory block onset times, total block durations, postoperative pain, amount of postoperative analgesic used and patient satisfaction were recorded. Results: Demographic data, distribution of surgical area and hemodynamic data were similar between the two groups. Surgery, motor and sensory block durations of Group B and L patients did not vary statistically significantly. However, motor and sensory block onset times in Group B were significantly shorter than Group L (p < 0.05). The mean time for first postoperative analgesic demand were 16.6 ± 8.0 h in Group B and 14.4 ± 7.3 h in Group L (p > 0.05). Conclusion: 30 ml 0.5% bupivacaine and levobupivacaine provide similar block characteristics for supraclavicular block. Bupivacaine leads to faster motor and sensory block onset compared to levobupivacaine however similar duration of postoperative analgesia. .

Justificativa e objetivos: a taxa de sucesso de aplicações de cateter é baixa em bloqueio supraclavicular. Assim, bupivacaína e levobupivacaína tornaram-se importantes por causa do efeito de longa duração em práticas de injeção única. Neste estudo, o objetivo foi comparar a eficácia, os efeitos colaterais e as complicações de bupivacaína e levobupivacaína em bloqueio supraclavicular. Métodos: foram randomizados em grupos de 30 cada 60 pacientes, entre 20-65 anos, 50-100 kg, estado físico ASA I-II-III, programados para cirurgia de mão, antebraço e braço com bloqueio supraclavicular. Receberam 30 mL de bupivacaína a 0,5% (Grupo B) ou 30 mL de levobupivacaína a 0,5% (Grupo L). Os bloqueios sensorial e motor foram avaliados e o tempo de início dos bloqueios, a duração dos bloqueios, a dor pós-operatória, a quantidade de analgesia pós-operatória e a satisfação dos pacientes foram registrados. Resultados: os dados demográficos, a distribuição da área cirúrgica e os dados hemodinâmicos foram semelhantes entre os dois grupos. A duração da cirurgia e dos bloqueios sensorial e motor não foi estatisticamente diferente entre os grupos B e L. Contudo, os tempos de início dos bloqueios sensorial e motor do Grupo B foram significativamente menores do que os do Grupo L (p < 0,05). O tempo médio para a primeira solicitação de analgésico no pós-operatório foi de 16,6 ± 8 horas no grupo B e 14,4 ± 7,3 horas no Grupo L (p > 0,05). Conclusão: características semelhantes para o bloqueio supraclavicular são fornecidas por 30 mL de bupivacaína a 0,5% e levobupivacaína. Bupivacaína proporciona início mais rápido de bloqueio sensorial e motor em comparação ...

Justificación y objetivos: la tasa de éxito de las aplicaciones de catéter es baja en el bloqueo supraclavicular. Así, la bupivacaína y la levobupivacaína son importantes debido al efecto a largo plazo en las prácticas de inyección única. En este estudio, el objetivo fue comparar la eficacia, los efectos colaterales y las complicaciones de la bupivacaína y la levobupivacaína en el bloqueo supraclavicular. Métodos: sesenta pacientes, con edades entre 20-65 años, 50-100 kg, estado físico ASA I-II-III, programados para cirugía de mano, antebrazo y brazo con bloqueo supraclavicular, fueron aleatorizados en grupos de 30 pacientes cada uno. Los pacientes recibieron 30 mL de bupivacaína al 0,5% (grupo B) o 30 mL de levobupivacaína al 0,5% (grupo L). Se evaluaron los bloqueos sensorial y motor y se registraron los tiempos de inicio de los bloqueos, duración de los bloqueos, dolor postoperatorio, cantidad de analgesia postoperatoria y satisfacción de los pacientes. Resultados: los datos demográficos, la distribución del área quirúrgica y los datos hemodinámicos fueron similares en los 2 grupos. La duración de la cirugía y de los bloqueos sensorial y motor no fue estadísticamente diferente entre los grupos B y L. Sin embargo, los tiempos de inicio de los bloqueos sensorial y motor del grupo B fueron significativamente menores que los del grupo L (p < 0,05). El tiempo promedio para la primera solicitación de analgésico en el postoperatorio fue de 16,6 ± 8,0 h en el grupo B y 14,4 ± 7,3 h en el grupo L (p > 0,05). Conclusión: los 30 mL de bupivacaína al 0,5% y levobupivacaína suministran características de bloqueo similares para el bloqueo supraclavicular. La bupivacaína proporciona un inicio más rápido de bloqueo sensorial y motor en comparación ...