RESUMO
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic generated the need to modify the current clinical educational model with the challenge of promoting safety and the continuity of clinical education through the use of virtual platforms. Since clinical training in hospital institutions cannot be substituted, a strategic training plan was developed to guarantee protection, safety, and academic continuity for students upon returning to clinical clerkships. The objective of this project was to develop and evaluate the impact of a massive hybrid training plan as an educative strategy to give the theoretical and practical knowledge required for the safe return of undergraduate students to their respective clinical activities in the context of this pandemic. An academic program was designed through a massive hybrid strategy to train 616 undergraduate students studying clinical cycles by presential, virtual, synchronous, and asynchronous activities. To know the program's impact, a study based on an initial evaluation and a final evaluation was carried out to evaluate the acquisition of the critical knowledge and skills of the program. A significant difference was found between the means of the initial and final evaluations (p <0.001), as well as a high impact of the intervention (d 1.6). Significant improvements in the areas of COVID-19 initial management (p <0.001) and personal protective equipment use (p <0.001) were seen in the post-test when compared to the initial evaluation. Both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis were carried out, finding positive results on the course design, quality of didactic resources, and instructors' performance. Massive hybrid training is an effective strategy to facilitate the reintegration of undergraduate students into their face-to-face clinical rotations.
RESUMO
COVID-19 can range from asymptomatic to life-threatening. Early identification of patients who will develop severe disease is crucial. A number of scores and indexes have been developed to predict severity. However, most rely on measurements not readily available. We evaluated hematological and biochemical markers taken on admission and determined how predictive they were of development of critical illness or death. We observed that higher values of readily available tests, including neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio; derived neutrophil index; and troponin I were associated with a higher risk of death or critical care admission (P < 0.001). We show that common hematological tests can be helpful in determining early in the course of illness which patients are likely to develop severe forms, as well as allocating resources to those patients early, while avoiding overuse of limited resources in patients with reduced risk of progression to severe disease.
