RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Isolated spaces impair communication and teamwork during tracheal intubation (TI) in suspected coronavirus disease 2019 patients. We thus aimed to evaluate the telemedicine-assisted airway model (TAM) to improve communication and teamwork during the pandemic. METHODS: This two-stage prospective study included adult patients intubated in the emergency department of the National Taiwan University Hospital between 1 August 2020 and 31 July 2021. First, we randomised patients receiving TI in the standard setting into the conventional group (Con-G) and the isolation area into the isolation group (Iso-G). We evaluated the obstacles to communication and teamwork in an isolation scenario. Second, we developed the TAM to facilitate communication and teamwork between staff in separate spaces during TI and assigned patients to the TAM group (TAM-G). Communication and teamwork were evaluated using the Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM). Subjective evaluations were conducted using a questionnaire administered to medical staff. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were enrolled: 17, 34, and 38 in the Con-G, Iso-G, and TAM-G, respectively. The communication frequency (CF) of the Con-G and Iso-G was the highest and lowest, respectively. The CF of the TAM-G increased and approached that of the Con-G. The overall TEAM score was the highest in the Con-G and the lowest in the Iso-G, while the overall score in the TAM-G was comparable to that of the Con-G. DISCUSSION: The TAM may improve communication and teamwork for TIs without compromising efficacy during the pandemic. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov; registration numbers: NCT04479332 and NCT04591873.
RESUMEN
Background: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a critical condition and the leading cause of mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Scores that predict mortality have been established, but a patient's clinical course is often nonlinear. Thus, factors present during acute care management may be explored. This study intended to develop a risk-predictive model for patients with CS. Methods: In this observational study, adult patients who received inotropic support at the Emergency Room (ER) from January 2017 to August 2020 and were admitted to the cardiac care unit (CCU) with a diagnosis of CS were enrolled in this study. Patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, inotropic support for bradycardia, and survival <24 h after ER arrival were excluded. A total of 311 patients were enrolled and categorized into derivation (n = 243) and validation (n = 68) cohorts. Results: A history of coronary artery disease, multiple inotrope use, ejection fraction <40%, lower hemoglobin concentration, longer cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration, albumin infusion, and renal replacement therapy were identified as independent prognostic factors for in-hospital mortality. The cardiogenic shock prognosis (CSP) score was established as a nomogram and three risk groups were identified: low-risk (score 115, 0% of mortality), medium-risk (score 116-209, 8.75% of mortality), and high-risk (score 210, 66.67% of mortality). The area-under-the-curve (AUC) of the CSP score was 0.941, and the discrimination value in the validation cohort was consistent (AUC = 0.813). Conclusions: The CSP score represents a risk-predictive model for in-hospital mortality in patients with CS in acute care settings. Patients identified as the high-risk category may have a poor prognosis.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the recommended observation period of 7 days for cardiac arrest survivors is sufficient for conscious recovery and to identify the variables associated with eventual neurologic recovery among patients with delayed awakening. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A single tertiary medical center. PATIENTS: Five-hundred twenty-nine nontraumatic adult cardiac arrest survivors with prearrest favorable neurologic function (Cerebral Performance Category 1-2) who survived to hospital discharge during 2011-2019. INTERVENTIONS: The enrolled patients were classified into favorable (Cerebral Performance Category 1-2) and poor (Cerebral Performance Category 3-4) neurologic recovery according to their neurologic function at hospital discharge. Among patients with favorable neurologic recovery, those who recovered within 7 days were assigned to the early recovery group or after 7 days as the late recovery group. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 395 patients exhibiting favorable neurologic recovery (n = 357 in the early group, n = 38 in late group) and 134 patients exhibiting poor neurologic recovery (poor recovery group). Among patients who remained unconscious on day 7, delayed awakening was associated with male sex (odds ratio [OR], 3.905; 95% CI, 1.153-13.221), prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (OR, 7.628; 95% CI, 2.084-27.922), therapeutic hypothermia (OR, 4.320; 95% CI, 1.624-11.488), and extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR, 4.508; 95% CI, 1.414-14.371). Being transferred from another hospital, however, was less likely to be associated with delayed awakening (OR, 0.061; 95% CI, 0.009-0.431). The median duration for patients to regain clear consciousness in the late recovery group was 12.12 days. No patient who recovered consciousness had an unfavorable electroencephalography pattern, however, in patients with poor recovery, the 7-day electroencephalography showed 45 patients with generalized suppression (33.6%), two with burst suppression (1.5%), 14 with seizure/epileptic discharge (10.5%), and one with status epilepticus (0.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Up to 9.6% of cardiac arrest patients with favorable outcomes recover consciousness after the recommended 7 days of observation, indicating the observation time of 7 days seems justified but longer duration may be needed. The results of the culturally and clinically isolated population may limit the application to other population.
