Nurse-Led Interventions in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death worldwide, causing 3.32 million deaths in 2019. COPD management has increasingly become a major component of general and hospital practice and has led to a different model of care. Nurse-led interventions have shown beneficial effects on COPD patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes. This systematic review was conducted to identify and assess nurse-led interventions in COPD patients in terms of mental, physical, and clinical status. The review was carried out following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. The relevance of each manuscript was assessed according to the inclusion criteria, and we retrieved full texts, as required, to reach our conclusions. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers, and the risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Forty-eight articles were included in the analysis, which focused on the management of COPD patients by hospital, respiratory and primary nursing care. Nursing management was shown to be highly effective in improving quality of life, emotional state, and pulmonary and physical capacity in COPD patients. In comparison, hospital and respiratory nurses carried out interventions with higher levels of effectiveness than community nurses.

Severe trauma patients and nursing practice-associated infections.

AIMS: Our study examined factors influencing the development of healthcare-associated infections in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary hospital in southern Spain. BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections are a frequent adverse event, significantly lengthening patient stays in the ICU. Nursing practice is a key factor in the infection control process. DESIGN: A retrospective longitudinal study with two observation periods (admission and discharge) was performed in an ICU of a tertiary hospital. METHODS: We analysed patient records for those admitted to this unit coded as CIE 800-959.9 from 2012 to 2016. Using binomial logistic regression analysis, we analysed factors associated with healthcare-associated infections. RESULTS: We analysed 375 records (men: 78.1%; average age: 46.63 years). Of these, 9.2% patients acquired a healthcare-associated infection during their stay. Nursing practice-related factors significantly associated with the development of infection were the number of days connected to mechanical ventilation and the number of days in the ICU. CONCLUSION: Healthcare-associated infections in patients with severe trauma admitted to the ICU are mainly associated with the management of invasive techniques. A multidisciplinary approach should focus on the review of action and care plans.

Intraosseous access in adults in cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis. / Vía intraósea en adultos en situación de parada cardiaca: revisión sistemática y metanálisis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of intraosseous access versus venous access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in terms of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to hospital discharge with or without favorable neurologic status. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of articles indexed in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Other terms adapted to the language of each index were also used. We included observational studies and clinical trials published from January 1, 1950, to May 31, 2019, if the study population included adult patients in cardiac arrest outside the hospital and in whom an intraosseous or intravenous catheter was inserted. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tools. RESULTS: We identified 434 papers to include in the qualitative review and 5 studies for meta-analysis. Intraosseous access was related to a lower rate of ROSC (odds ratio [OR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57-0.83; P=.02; I2=65%) and worse survival to discharge (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.83); P<.01, I2=30%). CONCLUSION: Intraosseous access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is related to poorer outcomes in terms of ROSC and survival at hospital discharge.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la efectividad, en relación al retorno a circulación espontánea, la supervivencia al alta y la supervivencia al alta con buen estado neurológico, del acceso intraóseo frente al acceso venoso en la resucitación en parada cardiaca extrahospitalaria. METODO: Se realiza una revisión sistemática y metanálisis en las bases de datos Medline (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science y Cochrane Library. Se incluyeron estudios observacionales y ensayos clínicos registrados en las bases de datos mencionadas desde el 1 de enero de 1950 hasta el 31 de mayo de 2019, en los que la población incluida fueran pacientes adultos en situación de parada cardiaca extrahospitalaria y que tuvieran canalizado un acceso intraóseo o intravenoso. La evaluación del riesgo de sesgo se realizó mediante la herramienta de evaluación de sesgo de Cochrane y la herramienta GRADE. RESULTADOS: Se identificaron 434 referencias de las que 5 se incluyen en la síntesis cualitativa y cuantitativa. El acceso intraóseo se relaciona con una peor tasa de retorno a circulación espontánea [OR 0,69 (IC 95%: 0,57-0,83), p = 0,02, I 2 = 65%] y una peor supervivencia al alta hospitalaria [OR 0,65 (IC 95%: 0,51-0,83); p < 0,01, I2 = 30%] en comparación con el acceso venoso. CONCLUSIONES: El acceso intraóseo en pacientes en situación de parada cardiaca extrahospitalaria se relaciona con peores resultados en términos de retorno a circulación espontánea y supervivencia al alta hospitalaria.

Epinephrine in cardiac arrest: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: evaluate the effectiveness of epinephrine used during cardiac arrest and its effect on the survival rates and neurological condition. Method: systematic review of scientific literature with meta-analysis, using a random effects model. The following databases were used to research clinical trials and observational studies: Medline, Embase and Cochrane, from 2005 to 2015. Results: when the Return of Spontaneous Circulation (ROSC) with administration of epinephrine was compared with ROSC without administration, increased rates were found with administration (OR 2.02. 95% CI 1.49 to 2.75; I2 = 95%). Meta-analysis showed an increase in survival to discharge or 30 days after administration of epinephrine (OR 1.23; 95% IC 1.05-1.44; I2=83%). Stratification by shockable and non-shockable rhythms showed an increase in survival for non-shockable rhythm (OR 1.52; 95% IC 1.29-1.78; I2=42%). When compared with delayed administration, the administration of epinephrine within 10 minutes showed an increased survival rate (OR 2.03; 95% IC 1.77-2.32; I2=0%). Conclusion: administration of epinephrine appears to increase the rate of ROSC, but when compared with other therapies, no positive effect was found on survival rates of patients with favorable neurological status.

Epinephrine in cardiac arrest: systematic review and meta-analysis / A adrenalina durante parada cardíaca: revisão sistemática e meta-análise / Adrenalina en el paro cardíaco: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis

abstract Objective: evaluate the effectiveness of epinephrine used during cardiac arrest and its effect on the survival rates and neurological condition. Method: systematic review of scientific literature with meta-analysis, using a random effects model. The following databases were used to research clinical trials and observational studies: Medline, Embase and Cochrane, from 2005 to 2015. Results: when the Return of Spontaneous Circulation (ROSC) with administration of epinephrine was compared with ROSC without administration, increased rates were found with administration (OR 2.02. 95% CI 1.49 to 2.75; I2 = 95%). Meta-analysis showed an increase in survival to discharge or 30 days after administration of epinephrine (OR 1.23; 95% IC 1.05-1.44; I2=83%). Stratification by shockable and non-shockable rhythms showed an increase in survival for non-shockable rhythm (OR 1.52; 95% IC 1.29-1.78; I2=42%). When compared with delayed administration, the administration of epinephrine within 10 minutes showed an increased survival rate (OR 2.03; 95% IC 1.77-2.32; I2=0%). Conclusion: administration of epinephrine appears to increase the rate of ROSC, but when compared with other therapies, no positive effect was found on survival rates of patients with favorable neurological status.

resumo Objetivo: avaliar a efetividade da adrenalina na parada cardíaca e seu efeito na sobrevivência e no estado neurológico. Métodos: revisão sistemática da literatura científica com meta-análise utilizando um modelo de efeitos aleatórios. Revisão em Medline, Embase e Cochrane, desde 2005 até 2015 de ensaios clínicos e estudos observacionais. Resultados: observou-se aumento nas taxas de retorno de circulação espontânea com a administração de adrenalina (OR 2,02; 95% IC 1,49-2,75; I2=95%) comparadas com a não administração de adrenalina. A meta-análise mostrou um aumento da sobrevivência na alta ou depois de 30 dias da administração de adrenalina (OR 1,23; 95% IC 1,05-1,44; I2=83%). Quando estratificados por ritmos desfibrilháveis e não desfibrilháveis apareceu um aumento da sobrevivência nos ritmos não desfibrilháveis (OR 1,52; 95% IC 1,29-1,78; I2=42%). Também observou-se um incremento de sobrevivência na alta ou depois de 30 dias, quando administrada a adrenalina antes de 10 minutos, isto comparado com administração tardia (OR 2,03; 95% IC 1,77-2,32; I2=0%). Conclusão: a administração de adrenalina parece incrementar a taxa de retorno da circulação espontânea, mas não se tem encontrado um efeito positivo nas taxas de sobrevivência nem nas taxas de pacientes com estado neurológico favorável, em comparação com outras terapias.

resumen Objetivo: evaluar la efectividad de la adrenalina en el paro cardíaco y su efecto en la supervivencia y en el estado neurológico. Métodos: revisión sistemática de la literatura científica con metaanálisis utilizando un modelo de efectos aleatorios. Revisión en Medline, Embase y Cochrane, desde 2005 hasta 2015, de ensayos clínicos y estudios observacionales. Resultados: se observó aumento en las tasas de retorno de circulación espontánea cuando administrada adrenalina (OR 2,02; 95% IC 1,49-2,75; I2=95%) comparada con la no administración de adrenalina. El metaanálisis mostró un aumento de la supervivencia al alta hospitalaria o a los 30 días cuando administrada adrenalina (OR 1,23; 95% IC 1,05-1,44; I2=83%). La estratificación por ritmos desfibrilables y no desfibrilables mostró un aumento de la supervivencia en ritmos no desfibrilables (OR 1,52; 95% IC 1,29-1,78; I2=42%). También, se observó un incremento en la supervivencia al alta hospitalaria o a los 30 días en la administración de adrenalina antes de 10 minutos comparada con la administración tardía (OR 2,03; 95% IC 1,77-2,32; I2=0%). Conclusión: la administración de adrenalina parece incrementar la tasa de retorno de circulación espontánea, pero no se ha encontrado un efecto positivo en tasas de supervivencia ni en tasas de pacientes con estado neurológico favorable, en comparación con otras terapias.