Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Front Oncol ; 12: 936795, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35832554

ABSTRACT

Background: International studies have documented that over a third of all hospital beds are occupied by patients with palliative care needs in their last year of life. Experiences of Palliative Care Services that take place prevalently or exclusively in hospital settings are very few in Italy. Objective: Describe clinical, educational and research activities performed by a hospital PCS and discussing opportunities and critical issues encountered in an Italian Cancer Center. Method: Retrospective data regarding adults with advanced stage diseases referred from January 2015 to December 2019. Results: Clinical activity - The PCS performed 2422 initial consultations with an average of 484 initial consultations per year. A majority of patients had advanced cancer, from 85% to 72%, with an average of 2583 total consultations per year and an average of 4.63 consultations per patient. The penetrance has increased over time from 6.3% to 15.75%. Educational and research activity - Since 2015, PCS has provided training to health professionals (HPs) of different departments of our hospital. Most of the educational projects for HPs were part of research projects, for example the communication training program, management of pain and end-of-life symptoms and the training program for PC-based skills. Conclusion: Our data suggests that a PCS able to provide palliative care to inpatients and outpatient and continuous training support to other hospital specialists can relatively quickly improve the level of its penetrance in hospital activities.

2.
Eur Respir J ; 60(4)2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35361632

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: Pulse glucocorticoid therapy is used in hyperinflammation related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of pulse intravenous methylprednisolone in addition to standard treatment in COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 304 hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were randomised to receive 1 g of methylprednisolone intravenously for three consecutive days or placebo in addition to standard dexamethasone. The primary outcome was the duration of patient hospitalisation, calculated as the time interval between randomisation and hospital discharge without the need for supplementary oxygen. The key secondary outcomes were survival free from invasive ventilation with orotracheal intubation and overall survival. RESULTS: Overall, 112 (75.4%) out of 151 patients in the pulse methylprednisolone arm and 111 (75.2%) of 150 in the placebo arm were discharged from hospital without oxygen within 30 days from randomisation. Median time to discharge was similar in both groups (15 days, 95% CI 13.0-17.0 days and 16 days, 95% CI 13.8-18.2 days, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.71-1.20; p=0.528). No significant differences between pulse methylprednisolone and placebo arms were observed in terms of admission to intensive care unit with orotracheal intubation or death (20.0% versus 16.1%; HR 1.26, 95% CI 0.74-2.16; p=0.176) or overall mortality (10.0% versus 12.2%; HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.42-1.64; p=0.584). Serious adverse events occurred with similar frequency in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Methylprenisolone pulse therapy added to dexamethasone was not of benefit in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Methylprednisolone , Glucocorticoids , Double-Blind Method , Oxygen , Treatment Outcome
3.
JAMA Intern Med ; 181(1): 24-31, 2021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33080005

ABSTRACT

Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is threatening billions of people worldwide. Tocilizumab has shown promising results in retrospective studies in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with a good safety profile. Objective: To evaluate the effect of early tocilizumab administration vs standard therapy in preventing clinical worsening in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial that randomized patients hospitalized between March 31 and June 11, 2020, with COVID-19 pneumonia to receive tocilizumab or standard of care in 24 hospitals in Italy. Cases of COVID-19 were confirmed by polymerase chain reaction method with nasopharyngeal swab. Eligibility criteria included COVID-19 pneumonia documented by radiologic imaging, partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (Pao2/Fio2) ratio between 200 and 300 mm Hg, and an inflammatory phenotype defined by fever and elevated C-reactive protein. Interventions: Patients in the experimental arm received intravenous tocilizumab within 8 hours from randomization (8 mg/kg up to a maximum of 800 mg), followed by a second dose after 12 hours. Patients in the control arm received supportive care following the protocols of each clinical center until clinical worsening and then could receive tocilizumab as a rescue therapy. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary composite outcome was defined as entry into the intensive care unit with invasive mechanical ventilation, death from all causes, or clinical aggravation documented by the finding of a Pao2/Fio2 ratio less than 150 mm Hg, whichever came first. Results: A total of 126 patients were randomized (60 to the tocilizumab group; 66 to the control group). The median (interquartile range) age was 60.0 (53.0-72.0) years, and the majority of patients were male (77 of 126, 61.1%). Three patients withdrew from the study, leaving 123 patients available for the intention-to-treat analyses. Seventeen patients of 60 (28.3%) in the tocilizumab arm and 17 of 63 (27.0%) in the standard care group showed clinical worsening within 14 days since randomization (rate ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.59-1.86). Two patients in the experimental group and 1 in the control group died before 30 days from randomization, and 6 and 5 patients were intubated in the 2 groups, respectively. The trial was prematurely interrupted after an interim analysis for futility. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and Pao2/Fio2 ratio between 200 and 300 mm Hg who received tocilizumab, no benefit on disease progression was observed compared with standard care. Further blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm the results and to evaluate possible applications of tocilizumab in different stages of the disease. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04346355; EudraCT Identifier: 2020-001386-37.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hospital Mortality , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Aged , Blood Gas Analysis , C-Reactive Protein/metabolism , COVID-19/metabolism , COVID-19/physiopathology , Disease Progression , Early Termination of Clinical Trials , Female , Fever , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy , Male , Medical Futility , Middle Aged , Receptors, Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Respiratory Insufficiency/physiopathology , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Tumori ; 106(1): 25-32, 2020 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31456509

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several approaches towards pain control for admitted cancer patients have been suggested by the literature without achieving satisfactory results. In this quality improvement project, we proposed a multicomponent intervention. MEASURES: A set of indicators was established for each component of the project. The feasibility of both the intervention and its evaluation system was measured. According to the literature review and the analysis of the local context, 5 active components were identified, piloted, and assessed: training of ward professionals, education of patients and nonprofessional caregivers, regular pain assessment, specialist-level pain consultation procedures, and involvement of hospital management. RESULTS: Multiprofessional training programs with daily discussions, daily pain assessment, and a readily available specialized palliative care service seem to be the active components of this complex intervention. The quality improvement project achieved 2 years sustainability. CONCLUSION: Consolidated educational and organizational methodologies support the feasibility of this complex intervention.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain/epidemiology , Inpatients , Pain Management , Pain Measurement , Quality Improvement , Cancer Pain/diagnosis , Cancer Pain/therapy , Caregivers , Disease Management , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Male , Models, Theoretical , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pain Management/methods , Pain Management/standards , Pain Measurement/methods , Pain Measurement/standards , Patient Education as Topic , Referral and Consultation
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...