Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
PLoS One ; 17(12): e0279208, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36525437

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We have had 3 coronavirus-related pandemics in the last two decades. Each has brought significant toll and with each case there was no cure. Even as vaccines have been developed for the current strain of the virus thereby increasing the prospects of bringing transmissions in communities to a minimum, lessons from this pandemic should be explored in preparation for future pandemics. Other studies have looked at differences in characteristics of patients and mortality rates between the first two waves. In our study we not only identify the differences in outcomes but also explore differences in hospital specific interventions that were implemented at Jersey City Medical Center, NJ, a community-based hospital. AIM: The aim of this study is to assess the differences between the first two waves of the COVID -19 pandemic in terms of management and outcomes to help identify any key lessons in the handling of future pandemics. We compared the population demographics, interventions and outcomes used during the first two waves of COVID-19 in a community-based hospital. METHODS: This is a retrospective single-center cross-sectional study including Laboratory confirmed COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen supplementation admitted at Jersey City Medical Center during the first wave (April 1 to June 30, 2020) and the second wave between (October 1, 2020, and January 1, 2021). The Chi-squared test was used to assess the relationship between categorical variables and the T- test for continuous variables. A Logistic regression model was built comparing the second to the first wave while accounting for important covariates. RESULTS: There was a combined total of 473 patients from both waves. Patients in the first wave were older (66.17 years vs 60.38 years, p <0.01), had more comorbidities (2.75 vs 2.29, p 0.003), had more severe disease (50% vs 38.78% p of 0.002), had a longer length of stay (14.18 days vs 8.77 days, p <0.001) and were more likely to be intubated (32.49% vs 21.9 4%, p 0.01). In the univariate model, the odds of mortality in the second wave compared to the first wave was 0.63 (CI, 0.41-0.96) and 1.73 (CI, 0.65-4.66) in the fully adjusted model. CONCLUSION: Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the two waves. Interventions that were noted to be significantly different between the two waves were, increased likelihood of mechanical intubation in the first wave and increased use of steroids in the second wave compared to the first.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospitals, Community , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Retrospective Studies , Patients
2.
Medsurg Nurs ; 25(3): 163-7, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27522843

ABSTRACT

A multi-site descriptive retrospective study of physiologic, demographic, and psychosocial factors associated with 30-day readmissions for heart failure was conducted in six Magnet-designated hospitals. Results can be used to plan effective nursing interventions to target readmitted patients.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure/epidemiology , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , New Jersey/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...