Clinical-epidemiological profile of the patient attended in a fracture liaison service (FLS) of a regional hospital in north-west of Spain. / [Artículo traducido] Perfil clínico-epidemiológico del paciente atendido en una unidad multidisciplinar de fractura de cadera de un hospital de primer nivel en el noroeste de España.

INTRODUCTION: Hip fractures constitute a capital public health issue associated with aging and frailty because of its impact on both quality of life and morbidity and mortality in older people. Fracture liaison services (FLS) have been proposed as tools to minimize this emergent problem. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted with 101 patients treated for hip fracture by the FLS of a regional hospital between October 2019 and June 2021 (20 months). Epidemiological, clinical, surgical, and management variables were collected during admission and up to 30 days after discharge. RESULTS: Mean age of patients was 87.6 ± 6.1 years and 77.2% were female. Some degree of cognitive impairment was detected at admission in 71.3% of patients using the Pfeiffer questionnaire, and 13.9% were nursing home residents, and 76.24% could walk independently before the fracture. Fractures were more commonly pertrochanteric (45.5%). Patients were receiving antiosteoporotic therapy in 10.9% of cases. The median surgical delay from admission was 26 h (RIC 15-46 h), the median length of stay was 6 days (RIC 3-9 days) and in-hospital mortality was 10.9%, and 19.8% at 30 days, with a readmission rate of 5%. DISCUSSION: Patients treated in our FLS at the beginning of its activity were similar to the general picture in our country in terms of age, sex, type of fracture, and proportion of patients treated surgically. A high mortality rate was observed, and low rates of pharmacological secondary prevention were followed at discharge. Clinical results of FLS implementation in regional hospitals should be assessed prospectively in order to decide their suitability.

The early use of sepsis scores to predict respiratory failure and mortality in non-ICU patients with COVID-19.

This observational retrospective study aimed to investigate the usefulness of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Quick SOFA (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), and quick NEWS in predicting respiratory failure and death among patients with COVID-19 hospitalized outside of intensive care units (ICU). We included 237 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who were followed-up on for one month or until death. Respiratory failure was defined as a PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤200mmHg or the need for mechanical ventilation. Respiratory failure occurred in 77 patients (32.5%), 29 patients (12%) were admitted to the ICU, and 49 patients (20.7%) died. Discrimination of respiratory failure was slightly higher in NEWS, followed by SOFA. Regarding mortality, SOFA was more accurate than the other scores. In conclusion, sepsis scores are useful for predicting respiratory failure and mortality in COVID-19 patients. A NEWS score ≥4 was found to be the best cutoff point for predicting respiratory failure.

Utilidad de las escalas de sepsis para predecir el fallo respiratorio y la muerte en pacientes con COVID-19 fuera de las Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos / The early use of sepsis scores to predict respiratory failure and mortality in non-ICU patients with COVID-19

El presente estudio retrospectivo observacional tiene como objetivo analizar la utilidad de las escalas SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), qSOFA (Quick SOFA), NEWS (National Early Warning Score ) y Quick NEWS para predecir el fallo respiratorio y la muerte en pacientes con COVID-19 atendidos fuera de la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI). Se incluyeron 237 adultos con COVID-19 hospitalizados seguidos durante un mes o hasta su fallecimiento. El fallo respiratorio se definió como un cociente PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 200 mmHg o la necesidad de ventilación mecánica. Setenta y siete pacientes (32,5%) desarrollaron fallo ventilatorio; 29 (12%) precisaron ingreso en UCI, y 49 fallecieron (20,7%). La discriminación del fallo ventilatorio fue algo mayor con la puntuación NEWS, seguida de la SOFA. En cuanto a la mortalidad, la puntuación SOFA fue más exacta que las otras escalas. En conclusión, las escalas de sepsis son útiles para predecir el fallo respiratorio y la muerte en COVID-19. Una puntuación ≥ 4 en la escala NEWS sería el mejor punto de corte para predecir fallo respiratorio (AU)

This observational retrospective study aimed to investigate the usefulness of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Quick SOFA (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), and quick NEWS in predicting respiratory failure and death among patients with COVID-19 hospitalized outside of intensive care units (ICU). We included 237 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who were followed-up on for one month or until death. Respiratory failure was defined as a PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 200 mmHg or the need for mechanical ventilation. Respiratory failure occurred in 77 patients (32.5%), 29 patients (12%) were admitted to the ICU, and 49 patients (20.7%) died. Discrimination of respiratory failure was slightly higher in NEWS, followed by SOFA. Regarding mortality, SOFA was more accurate than the other scores. In conclusion, sepsis scores are useful for predicting respiratory failure and mortality in COVID-19 patients. A NEWS score ≥ 4 was found to be the best cutoff point for predicting respiratory failure (AU)

[Health-related quality of life in patients recovered from COVID-19]. / Calidad de vida relacionada con la salud en pacientes recuperados de COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The presence of symptoms after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection is frequent and has an impact on patients' quality of life. The aim of this study is to assess the health-related quality of life of COVID-19 survivors and to ascertain which factors are related to worse results. METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional study has been performed, using, a telephone survey that was administered to all patients with COVID-19 from the first pandemic wave in our healthcare area 10months after the acute infection. Patients with dementia and nursing home residents were excluded. Health-related quality of life was assessed using the EQ-5D instrument and its índices EQ-VAS and EQ-Health Index. RESULTS: 443 answers were collected. Mean age was 54±16 and 38.4% of patients were male. The most affected domain was anxiety/depression (23.9% of patients) and mobility (16.5%). Mean global EQ-VAS score was 75.8±18.7, and mean EQ-Health Index was 0.884±0.174. Both VAS and Health Index scores were lower in females, patients older than 65 years, patients with comorbidities, and those who needed hospital admission during the acute infection. VAS scores in our sample were lower than in the general Spanish population, but similar to the scores in our region prior to the pandemic. Female sex, hospital admission, and a lower educational status were independently associated to lower EQ-Health Index scoring. CONCLUSION: While health self-perception is affected after COVID-19, this might not be directly related to the infection. There exist profiles of patients more prone to a worse quality of life in which interventions may be considered.

[The early use of sepsis scores to predict respiratory failure and mortality in non-ICU patients with COVID-19]. / Utilidad de las escalas de sepsis para predecir el fallo respiratorio y la muerte en pacientes con COVID-19 fuera de las Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos.

This observational retrospective study aimed to investigate the usefulness of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Quick SOFA (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), and quick NEWS in predicting respiratory failure and death among patients with COVID-19 hospitalized outside of intensive care units (ICU). We included 237 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who were followed-up on for one month or until death. Respiratory failure was defined as a PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 200 mmHg or the need for mechanical ventilation. Respiratory failure occurred in 77 patients (32.5%), 29 patients (12%) were admitted to the ICU, and 49 patients (20.7%) died. Discrimination of respiratory failure was slightly higher in NEWS, followed by SOFA. Regarding mortality, SOFA was more accurate than the other scores. In conclusion, sepsis scores are useful for predicting respiratory failure and mortality in COVID-19 patients. A NEWS score ≥ 4 was found to be the best cutoff point for predicting respiratory failure.

Serum and CSF alpha-synuclein levels do not change in COVID-19 patients with neurological symptoms.

SARS-CoV-2 infection can associate diverse neurological manifestations. Several studies have provided proof to support the theory of neurotropic involvement of SARS-CoV-2. Alpha-synuclein has been described as a native antiviral factor within neurons, and upregulation of this protein can be seen in animals that suffered other neuroinvasive infections. To assess if increased expression of this protein takes place in COVID-19 patients with neurological symptoms, we analyzed serum total alpha-synuclein levels in three groups: seven COVID-19 patients with myoclonus, Parkinsonism and/or encephalopathy; thirteen age- and sex-matched COVID-19 patients without neurological involvement and eight age- and sex-matched healthy controls. We did not find differences among them. In a subset of four patients, the change in serum alpha-synuclein before and after the onset of neurological symptoms was not significant either. Cerebrospinal fluid alpha-synuclein levels were also similar between neurological COVID-19 and healthy controls. Overall, these results cannot support the hypothesis of alpha-synuclein upregulation in humans with neurological symptoms in COVID-19. Further research taking into account a larger group of COVID-19 patients including the whole spectrum of neurological manifestations and disease severity is needed.