RESUMO
BACKGROUND: To determine the clinical impact of wound management technique on surgical site infection (SSI), hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality in emergent colorectal surgery. METHODS: A prospective observational study (2021-2023) of urgent or emergent colorectal surgery patients at 15 institutions was conducted. Pediatric patients and traumatic colorectal injuries were excluded. Patients were classified by wound closure technique: skin closed (SC), skin loosely closed (SLC), or skin open (SO). Primary outcomes were SSI, hospital LOS and in-hospital mortality rates. Multivariable regression was used to assess the effect of wound closure on outcomes after controlling for demographics, patient characteristics, ICU admission, vasopressor use, procedure details and wound class. A priori power analysis indicated that 138 patients per group were required to detect a 10% difference in mortality rates. RESULTS: In total, 557 patients were included (SC n = 262, SLC n = 124, SO n = 171). Statistically significant differences in BMI, race/ethnicity, ASA scores, EBL, ICU admission, vasopressor therapy, procedure details, and wound class were observed across groups (Table 1). Overall, average LOS was 16.9 ± 16.4 days, and rates of in-hospital mortality and SSI were 7.9% and 18.5%, respectively, with the lowest rates observed in the SC group (Table 2). After risk adjustment, SO was associated with increased risk of mortality (OR = 3.003, p = 0.028 in comparison to the SC group. SLC was associated with increased risk of superficial SSI (OR = 3.439, p = 0.014), after risk adjustment. CONCLUSION: When compared to the SC group, the SO group was associated with mortality, but comparable when considering all other outcomes, while the SLC was associated with increased superficial SSI. Complete skin closure may be a viable wound management technique in emergent colorectal surgery. STUDY TYPE: Level III Therapeutic/Care Management.
RESUMO
Pediatric iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is often treated with oral iron supplementation as the first-line therapy despite poor adherence. This single-institution retrospective chart review of pediatric patients was conducted to assess the safety, efficacy, and adherence of intravenous (IV) iron infusions compared to oral iron therapy in patients who had failed a trial of oral iron supplementation. We reviewed medical records of patients aged 1-21 with IDA who received at least one IV iron infusion at Cooper University Hospital between 2016 and 2021. Paired t-tests compared pre-infusion and post-infusion hematologic indices of hemoglobin (Hgb), mean corpuscular volume, red blood cell count, red cell distribution width, ferritin, total iron binding capacity, iron stores, and iron saturation. We compared adherence and adverse reactions to both oral iron supplementation and IV iron infusions using McNemar's test. A total of 107 subjects were included (mean age of 12.7 years). Hgb, ferritin, iron, and iron saturation between pre-infusion and post-final infusion significantly improved (p < 0.001). Hgb, ferritin, and iron improved when subcategorizing by race and etiology of IDA. Adherence to IV iron infusions (70.1%) was significantly greater than adherence to oral iron therapy (43.0%). There were also significantly fewer adverse effects with IV iron infusions (3.7%) compared to oral iron (77.9%). We demonstrated the safety, efficacy, and improved adherence of IV iron infusions compared to oral iron supplementation for treatment of pediatric IDA in patients who were unable to tolerate oral iron supplementation. Future studies could compare adherence to multiple doses of IV iron infusions in contrast with other single-dosing IV iron formulations.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: We assessed the impact of a hypothetical school-entry COVID-19 vaccine mandate on parental likelihood to vaccinate their child. METHODS: We collected demographics, COVID-19-related school concerns, and parental likelihood to vaccinate their child from parents of patients aged 3-16 years seen across nine pediatric Emergency Departments from 06/07/2021 to 08/13/2021. Wilcoxon signed-rank test compared pre- and post-mandate vaccination likelihood. Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses explored associations between parental concerns with baseline and change in vaccination likelihood, respectively. RESULTS: Vaccination likelihood increased from 43% to 50% with a hypothetical vaccine mandate (Z = -6.69, p < 0.001), although most parents (63%) had no change, while 26% increased and 11% decreased their vaccination likelihood. Parent concerns about their child contracting COVID-19 was associated with greater baseline vaccination likelihood. No single school-related concern explained the increased vaccination likelihood with a mandate. CONCLUSION: Parental school-related concerns did not drive changes in likelihood to vaccinate with a mandate.
