Spray nozzle for topical anaesthesia during flexible bronchoscopy: a randomised controlled trial.

Background: The effectiveness of using a spray nozzle to deliver lidocaine for superior topical airway anaesthesia during non-sedation flexible bronchoscopy (FB) remains a topic of uncertainty when compared with conventional methods. Methods: Patients referred for FB were randomly assigned to receive topical lidocaine anaesthesia via the bronchoscope's working channel (classical spray (CS) group) or through a washing pipe equipped with a spray nozzle (SN group). The primary outcome was cough rate, defined as the total number of coughs per minute. Secondary outcomes included subjective perceptions of both the patient and operator regarding the FB process. These perceptions were rated on a visual analogue scale, with numerical ratings ranging from 0 to 10. Results: Our study enrolled a total of 126 (61 CS group; 65 SN group) patients. The SN group exhibited a significantly lower median cough rate compared with the CS group (4.5 versus 7.1 counts·min-1; p=0.021). Patients in the SN group also reported less oropharyngeal discomfort (4.5±2.7 versus 5.6±2.9; p=0.039), better tolerance of the procedure (6.8±2.2 versus 5.7±2.7; p=0.011) and a greater willingness to undergo a repeat FB procedure (7.2±2.7 versus 5.8±3.4; p=0.015) compared with those in the CS group. From the operator's perspective, patient discomfort (2.7±1.7 versus 3.4±2.3; p=0.040) and cough scores (2.3±1.5 versus 3.2±2.4; p=0.013) were lower in the SN group compared with the CS group, with less disruption due to coughing observed among those in the SN group (1.6±1.4 versus 2.3±2.3; p=0.029). Conclusions: This study illustrates that employing a spray nozzle for the delivery of lidocaine provides superior topical airway anaesthesia during non-sedation FB compared with the traditional method.

Readmission outcomes following infectious hospitalization: same-care unit performed better than different-care unit.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies showed that same-hospital readmission is associated with better outcomes than different-hospital readmission. However, little is known about whether readmission to the same care unit (same-care unit readmission) after infectious hospitalization performs better than readmission to a different care unit at the same hospital (different-care unit readmission). METHODS: This retrospective study screened patients rehospitalized within 30 days following admission to two acute medical wards for infectious diseases from 2013 to 2015 and included only those readmitted for unplanned medical reasons. Outcomes of interest included hospital mortality and length of stay of readmitted patients. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifteen patients were included; of those, 149(47%) and 166(53%) were classified as same-care unit and different-care unit readmissions, respectively. Same-care unit patients were more likely to be older(76 years vs. 70 years; P = 0.001), have comorbid chronic kidney disease(20% vs. 9%; P = 0.008), and have a shorter time to readmission(13 days vs. 16 days; P = 0.020) than different-care unit patients. Univariate analysis showed that same-care unit patients had a shorter length of stay than different-care unit patients(13 days vs. 18 days; P = 0.001), but had similar hospital mortality(20% vs. 24%; P = 0.385). The multivariable linear regression model indicated that same-care unit readmission was associated with a 5-day shorter hospital stay than different-care unit readmission(P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Among patients readmitted within 30 days after hospitalization for infectious diseases, same-care unit readmission was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay than different-care unit readmission. Whenever feasible, it is encouraged to allocate a readmitted patient to the same care unit in hope of pursuing continuity and quality of care.

Differential roles of comorbidity burden and functional status in elderly and non-elderly patients with infections in general wards.

BACKGROUND: Differential roles of comorbidity burden, functional status and severity of illness in elderly and non-elderly patients admitted to general wards with infections in terms of short-term and long-term mortality remain poorly understood and worth further investigation. METHODS: From 2011 to 2013, patients admitted to general wards with a main diagnosis of infections were included and their Barthel index, Charlson comorbidity index and Pitt bacteremia score were collected to evaluate their association with in-hospital and 1-year outcomes of the study cohort. Age stratification was applied for all outcome analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2481 patients were identified, with main diagnoses of pneumonia (57%), urinary tract infection (28%) and intra-abdominal infection (18%). In-hospital mortality occurred in 291 (12%) of the population and was independently predicted by Barthel index ≤50 (odds ratio [OR] 5.67 and 2.73, respectively) and Charlson comorbidity index >2 (OR 1.49 and 2.87, respectively) in both elderly and non-elderly patients. Among 2190 hospital survivors, Barthel index ≤50 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.38) and Charlson comorbidity index >2 (HR 1.96) were associated with a higher hazard of 1-year mortality in elderly patients. However, only Charlson comorbidity index >2 (HR 2.87) was a significant characteristic of non-elderly patients to be correlated with higher 1-year mortality. CONCLUSION: This study found that functional status on admission was predictive of in-hospital mortality of general patients with infections irrespective of age groups; however, it played a differential role in 1-year mortality in between elderly and non-elderly patients, emphasizing the importance of functional assessment among the elderly.

Receipt of Vasopressors Is Positively Associated With the Length of the Actively Dying Process in Hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: End-of-life care is important in general hospitalization care. However, the clinical impact of using vasopressors on the length of the actively dying process is still controversial. METHODS: We reviewed patients who were hospitalized in general wards and died before discharge. We classified the patients into 2 groups: those who received vasopressors (RVs) and those who did not receive vasopressors (NRV). We analyzed the factors associated with the length of hospital stay (LOS) and the length of the actively dying process. RESULTS: In all, 745 participants, 10.01% of all admitted patients, were analyzed. Of them, 225 patients were RV group, and the remaining 520 were NRV group. Age and gender were comparable in the 2 groups. The use of vasopressors was associated with an admission diagnosis of sepsis and absence of Do-Not-Resuscitate consent and parenteral use of morphine. In multivariable analysis, a high Barthel index score, the absence of cancer and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and no receipt of vasopressors were independent factors for LOS. For the length of the actively dying process, a longer duration of inotropic agent, the receipt of vasopressors, and the absence of CPR were independent factors. CONCLUSION: In-hospital mortality is not uncommon during hospitalization in a general ward. The length of the actively dying process is extended by the use of vasopressors. Further prospective study is required for cautious evaluation of the pros and cons of using vasopressors at the end of life during hospitalization.