Insurance-based Disparities in Outcomes and Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Utilization for Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine insurance-based disparities in mortality, nonhome discharges, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: Using a national database of U.S. academic medical centers and their affiliated hospitals, the risk-adjusted association between mortality, nonhome discharge, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization and (1) the type of insurance coverage (private insurance, Medicare, dual enrollment in Medicare and Medicaid, and no insurance) and (2) the weekly hospital COVID-19 burden (0 to 5.0%; 5.1 to 10%, 10.1 to 20%, 20.1 to 30%, and 30.1% and greater) was evaluated. Modeling was expanded to include an interaction between payer status and the weekly hospital COVID-19 burden to examine whether the lack of private insurance was associated with increases in disparities as the COVID-19 burden increased. RESULTS: Among 760,846 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 214,992 had private insurance, 318,624 had Medicare, 96,192 were dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, 107,548 had Medicaid, and 23,560 had no insurance. Overall, 76,250 died, 211,702 had nonhome discharges, 75,703 were mechanically ventilated, and 2,642 underwent extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The adjusted odds of death were higher in patients with Medicare (adjusted odds ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.21 to 1.35]; P < 0.0005), dually enrolled (adjusted odds ratio, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.30 to 1.50]; P < 0.0005), Medicaid (adjusted odds ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.20 to 1.36]; P < 0.0005), and no insurance (adjusted odds ratio, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26 to 1.62]; P < 0.0005) compared to patients with private insurance. Patients with Medicare (adjusted odds ratio, 0.47; [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.58]; P < 0.0005), dually enrolled (adjusted odds ratio, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.24 to 0.43]; P < 0.0005), Medicaid (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.79]; P < 0.0005), and no insurance (adjusted odds ratio, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.56]; P < 0.001) were less likely to be placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation than patients with private insurance. Mortality, nonhome discharges, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization did not change significantly more in patients with private insurance compared to patients without private insurance as the COVID-19 burden increased. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with COVID-19, insurance-based disparities in mortality, nonhome discharges, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization were substantial, but these disparities did not increase as the hospital COVID-19 burden increased.

Blood pressure monitoring gaps in patients with left ventricular assist devices presenting for non-cardiac surgeries.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The hemodynamic assessment of patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) using noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) monitoring may be unreliable without pulsatile blood flow. The primary goal of this study is to examine the association between intraoperative blood pressure monitoring gaps of 10 min or greater and LVAD type in patients undergoing noncardiac surgeries with NIBP monitors at induction. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Single institution, academic university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: One-hundred fifteen patients undergoing 187 noncardiac surgeries without arterial lines at induction. INTERVENTIONS: Noncardiac surgery. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the association of blood pressure monitoring gaps, which were defined as ten minutes or greater, and LVAD type including the HeartMate 2 (HM2; Abbott, Chicago, IL) and the HeartMate 3 (HM3; Abbott, Chicago, IL), as evaluated by multivariable logistic regression analysis. MAIN RESULTS: After adjusting for patient characteristics, HM3 was associated with lower odds of monitoring gaps (p = 0.02). Additionally, the odds of a monitoring gap were higher in patients with morbid obesity (p = 0.04) and in surgical duration longer than 180 min (p = 0.001). In the post-hoc analysis, morbid obesity, general anesthesia, and prolonged surgeries were found to be associated with increased odds of arterial line placement after induction (p = 0.05, p = 0.007, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a HM2 undergoing noncardiac surgery had nearly three-fold higher odds of blood pressure monitoring gaps of 10 min or greater compared to patients with a HM3. Morbid obesity and prolonged surgical duration were also associated with a significant increase in monitoring gaps. Morbid obesity, general anesthesia, and longer surgical duration were found to have a greater odds of arterial line placement after induction. These results may help anesthesiologists determine the appropriateness of NIBP in patients with LVADs undergoing noncardiac surgeries.

Long-Term Survival of Patients With Cancer, Sepsis, and Vasopressor Requirements Based on Lactate Levels.

A prospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the 1-year survival of cancer patients with sepsis and vasopressor requirements. Eligible patients were admitted a Comprehensive Cancer Center's ICU and were compared based on their admission lactate levels. Of the 132 included patients, 87 (66%) had high lactate (HL; > 2.0 mmol/L), and 45 (34%) had normal lactate (NL; ≤ 2.0 mmol/L). The 1-year survival rates of the two groups were similar (HL 16% vs. NL 18%; p = 0.0921). After adjustment for ICU baseline characteristics, HL was not significantly associated with a 1-year survival (Hazards ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.94-2.05). Critically ill cancer patients with sepsis and vasopressor requirements, regardless of the lactate level, had 1-year survival of less than 20%. Large multicenter cancer registries would enable to confirm our findings and better understand the long-term trajectories of sepsis in this vulnerable population.

Manejo de la infección por Helicobacter pylori: apreciación crítica de la literatura / Treatment of the Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Critical Appraisal of the Literature

Introducción: la infección por Helicobacter pylori es un problema de salud pública, dada su relación con cáncer gástrico. El incremento de la resistencia bacteriana limita la erradicación efectiva, a pesar del empleo de diferentes esquemas de tratamiento. Métodos: revisión de la literatura en la base de datos Pubmed/Medline entre el 1 de enero de 2015 y el 31 de diciembre de 2016 sobre el manejo del Helicobacter pylori. Resultados: se incluyeron 26 artículos. La terapia secuencial sobresale como opción de tratamiento de primera línea para escenarios como Colombia. La implementación de coadyuvantes puede influir en las tasas de erradicación. Los estudios de epidemiología local y costo-efectividad son escasos. Conclusiones: el uso y conocimiento adecuado de los esquemas de manejo puede disminuir los costos para el sistema, la resistencia antimicrobiana y favorecer la erradicación de patógenos. Se requieren estudios para generar recomendaciones locales.

Introduction: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is a public health problem due to its relationship with gastric cáncer The escalation of antibiotic resistance hampers an effective eradication, despite the availability of treatment options. Methods: A review of the literature was performed in the database PubMed between 01/01/2015 and 31/31/2016. Results: Twenty six articles were included. Sequential therapy stands out as a first line therapy for scenarios such as Colombia. The implementation of adjuvants may have a positive impact on eradication rates. Local epidemiólogo- and cost-effectiveness studies are scarce. The results were analized by erradication therapies, coadyuvant treatment, guidelines and outcomes non mentioned in the guidelines. Conclusions: The correct use and knowledge of the different treatment options could reduce the costs for the health systems, the antibiotics resistance and could favor pathogen eradication. Further studies are required for establishing local recommendations.

Economic impact of dengue fever in Latin America and the Caribbean: a systematic review

[ABSTRACT]. Objectives. To assess the economic impact of dengue in Latin America and the Caribbean using a systematic review that includes studies not previously considered by other reviews. Methods. Cochrane methodology was used to conduct a systematic review of the cost of dengue in Latin America. PubMed Central, EMBASE, and the Biblioteca Virtual en Salud— which includes scientific, peer-reviewed journals not indexed by other databases—were searched from inception through August 2016. All articles that reported cost of illness data for countries in Latin America were included. Included studies underwent a methodological appraisal using a seven-question instrument designed for cost of illness studies. Extracted data were direct and indirect costs for outpatient and hospitalized cases and total cost of the disease. Values were adjusted to 2015 US dollars using the consumer price index. Results. From a total of 848 initial references, 17 studies were included, mainly from Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, and Puerto Rico; costs were available for 39 countries. The methodological appraisal showed that 70% of the studies met more than 70% of the evaluated items. The main economic impact of dengue was due to productivity costs. Average annual cost was more than US$ 3 billion. Direct costs represented over 70% of the total share for hospitalized cases. For outpatients, direct medical costs were low, but social costs were significant since indirect costs may account for up to 80% of the total cost. Conclusions. Dengue fever has a significant economic impact in Latin America. It is essential to develop new public health interventions, such as dengue vaccination, to decrease the propagation of the disease and its total cost.

[RESUMEN]. Objetivos. Evaluar las repercusiones económicas del dengue en América Latina y el Caribe mediante una revisión sistemática que abarcó estudios no considerados en otras revisiones anteriores. Métodos. Se usó la metodología de Cochrane para hacer una revisión sistemática del costo del dengue en América Latina. Se hizo una búsqueda en PubMed Central, EMBASE y la Biblioteca Virtual en Salud, que incluyen revistas científicas arbitradas no indizadas por otras bases de datos, desde su aparición hasta agosto del 2016. Se incluyeron todos los artículos que contenían datos sobre el costo de la enfermedad para los países de América Latina. Los estudios incluidos se sometieron a una evaluación metodológica para la cual se usó un instrumento de siete preguntas diseñado para los estudios sobre los costos de las enfermedades. Los datos extraídos fueron los costos directos e indirectos para los casos de pacientes ambulatorios y hospitalizados y el costo total de la enfermedad. Los valores se ajustaron a dólares de los Estados Unidos del 2015 con base en el índice de precios al consumidor. Resultados. De un total de 848 referencias iniciales, se incluyeron 17 estudios, principalmente de Brasil, Colombia, Cuba, México y Puerto Rico; se encontraron datos sobre los costos en 39 países. La evaluación metodológica indicó que 70% de los estudios reunían más de 70% de los puntos evaluados. La principal repercusión económica del dengue se debió a los costos por pérdida en la productividad. El costo anual promedio fue de más de USD 3.000 millones. Los costos directos representaron más de 70% del total para los casos de pacientes hospitalizados. En cuanto a los pacientes ambulatorios, los costos médicos directos fueron bajos, pero los costos sociales fueron considerables, ya que los costos indirectos pueden representar hasta 80% del costo total. Conclusiones. El dengue tiene importantes repercusiones económicas en América Latina. Es fundamental elaborar nuevas intervenciones en materia de salud pública, como la vacunación contra el dengue, para reducir la propagación de la enfermedad y su costo total.

[RESUMO]. Objetivos. Avaliar o impacto econômico da dengue na América Latina e o Caribe por meio de uma revisão sistemática que incluiu estudos não considerados anteriormente por outras revisões. Métodos. Utilizou-se a metodologia Cochrane para realizar uma revisão sistemática do custo da dengue na América Latina. Foi realizada uma busca dos bancos de dados PubMed Central, EMBASE e Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde— a qual inclui periódicos científicos com avaliação por pares não indexados por outros repositórios— desde sua criação até agosto de 2016. Todos os artigos que relataram dados de custo de doença para países da América Latina foram incluídos. Os estudos incluídos foram submetidos a uma avaliação metodológica usando um instrumento de sete perguntas desenvolvido para estudos de custo de doença. Os dados extraídos foram os custos diretos e indiretos para casos ambulatoriais e hospitalizados e o custo total da doença. Os valores foram ajustados para dólares de 2015, usando-se o índice de preços ao consumidor. Resultados. De 848 referências inicialmente identificadas, 17 estudos foram incluídos, principalmente do Brasil, Colômbia, Cuba, México e Porto Rico; dados sobre custos estavam disponíveis para 39 países. A avaliação metodológica demonstrou que 70% dos estudos apresentavam mais de 70% dos itens avaliados. O principal impacto econômico da dengue foi devido aos custos de produtividade. O custo médio anual foi superior a US$3 bilhões. Para casos que exigiram hospitalização, os custos diretos representaram mais de 70% do custo total. Para pacientes ambulatoriais, os custos médicos diretos foram baixos, mas os custos sociais foram significativos, pois os custos indiretos podem representar até 80% do custo total. Conclusões. A dengue tem impacto econômico considerável na América Latina. É essencial desenvolver novas intervenções de saúde pública, como a vacinação contra a dengue, para diminuir a propagação da doença e seu custo total.

Economic impact of dengue fever in Latin America and the Caribbean: a systematic review / Repercusiones económicas del dengue en América Latina y el Caribe: una revisión sistemática / Impacto econômico da dengue na América Latina e Caribe: revisão sistemática

ABSTRACT Objectives To assess the economic impact of dengue in Latin America and the Caribbean using a systematic review that includes studies not previously considered by other reviews. Methods Cochrane methodology was used to conduct a systematic review of the cost of dengue in Latin America. PubMed Central, EMBASE, and the Biblioteca Virtual en Salud—which includes scientific, peer-reviewed journals not indexed by other databases—were searched from inception through August 2016. All articles that reported cost of illness data for countries in Latin America were included. Included studies underwent a methodological appraisal using a seven-question instrument designed for cost of illness studies. Extracted data were direct and indirect costs for outpatient and hospitalized cases and total cost of the disease. Values were adjusted to 2015 US dollars using the consumer price index. Results From a total of 848 initial references, 17 studies were included, mainly from Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, and Puerto Rico; costs were available for 39 countries. The methodological appraisal showed that 70% of the studies met more than 70% of the evaluated items. The main economic impact of dengue was due to productivity costs. Average annual cost was more than US$ 3 billion. Direct costs represented over 70% of the total share for hospitalized cases. For outpatients, direct medical costs were low, but social costs were significant since indirect costs may account for up to 80% of the total cost. Conclusions Dengue fever has a significant economic impact in Latin America. It is essential to develop new public health interventions, such as dengue vaccination, to decrease the propagation of the disease and its total cost.

RESUMEN Objetivos Evaluar las repercusiones económicas del dengue en América Latina y el Caribe mediante una revisión sistemática que abarcó estudios no considerados en otras revisiones anteriores. Métodos Se usó la metodología de Cochrane para hacer una revisión sistemática del costo del dengue en América Latina. Se hizo una búsqueda en PubMed Central, EMBASE y la Biblioteca Virtual en Salud, que incluyen revistas científicas arbitradas no indizadas por otras bases de datos, desde su aparición hasta agosto del 2016. Se incluyeron todos los artículos que contenían datos sobre el costo de la enfermedad para los países de América Latina. Los estudios incluidos se sometieron a una evaluación metodológica para la cual se usó un instrumento de siete preguntas diseñado para los estudios sobre los costos de las enfermedades. Los datos extraídos fueron los costos directos e indirectos para los casos de pacientes ambulatorios y hospitalizados y el costo total de la enfermedad. Los valores se ajustaron a dólares de los Estados Unidos del 2015 con base en el índice de precios al consumidor. Resultados De un total de 848 referencias iniciales, se incluyeron 17 estudios, principalmente de Brasil, Colombia, Cuba, México y Puerto Rico; se encontraron datos sobre los costos en 39 países. La evaluación metodológica indicó que 70% de los estudios reunían más de 70% de los puntos evaluados. La principal repercusión económica del dengue se debió a los costos por pérdida en la productividad. El costo anual promedio fue de más de USD 3.000 millones. Los costos directos representaron más de 70% del total para los casos de pacientes hospitalizados. En cuanto a los pacientes ambulatorios, los costos médicos directos fueron bajos, pero los costos sociales fueron considerables, ya que los costos indirectos pueden representar hasta 80% del costo total. Conclusiones El dengue tiene importantes repercusiones económicas en América Latina. Es fundamental elaborar nuevas intervenciones en materia de salud pública, como la vacunación contra el dengue, para reducir la propagación de la enfermedad y su costo total.

RESUMO Objetivos Avaliar o impacto econômico da dengue na América Latina e o Caribe por meio de uma revisão sistemática que incluiu estudos não considerados anteriormente por outras revisões. Métodos Utilizou-se a metodologia Cochrane para realizar uma revisão sistemática do custo da dengue na América Latina. Foi realizada uma busca dos bancos de dados PubMed Central, EMBASE e Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde— a qual inclui periódicos científicos com avaliação por pares não indexados por outros repositórios—desde sua criação até agosto de 2016. Todos os artigos que relataram dados de custo de doença para países da América Latina foram incluídos. Os estudos incluídos foram submetidos a uma avaliação metodológica usando um instrumento de sete perguntas desenvolvido para estudos de custo de doença. Os dados extraídos foram os custos diretos e indiretos para casos ambulatoriais e hospitalizados e o custo total da doença. Os valores foram ajustados para dólares de 2015, usando-se o índice de preços ao consumidor. Resultados De 848 referências inicialmente identificadas, 17 estudos foram incluídos, principalmente do Brasil, Colômbia, Cuba, México e Porto Rico; dados sobre custos estavam disponíveis para 39 países. A avaliação metodológica demonstrou que 70% dos estudos apresentavam mais de 70% dos itens avaliados. O principal impacto econômico da dengue foi devido aos custos de produtividade. O custo médio anual foi superior a US$3 bilhões. Para casos que exigiram hospitalização, os custos diretos representaram mais de 70% do custo total. Para pacientes ambulatoriais, os custos médicos diretos foram baixos, mas os custos sociais foram significativos, pois os custos indiretos podem representar até 80% do custo total. Conclusões A dengue tem impacto econômico considerável na América Latina. É essencial desenvolver novas intervenções de saúde pública, como a vacinação contra a dengue, para diminuir a propagação da doença e seu custo total.