Access to Palliative Care for Critically Ill Cancer Patients in Mexico.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the outcomes of hospitalized cancer patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) intervention and receiving palliative care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational retrospective study was completed at a single academic critical care unit in Mexico City. All hospitalized cancer patients who were evaluated by the intensive care team to assess need for ICU were included between January and December 2018. RESULTS: During the study period, the ICU group made 408 assessments of critically ill cancer patients in noncritical hospitalized areas. In total, 24.2% (99/408) of the patients in this population were consulted by the palliative care team. Of the patients evaluated, 46.5% (190/408) had advanced stage, but only 28.4% were receiving care by the palliative care team. The only risk factor for hospital mortality in the multivariate analysis was the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score at the time of the consultation by the ICU group (HR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.34-3.29, p = 0.001). The median time between palliative care consultation and death was 3 days (IQR = 2-22). A total of 63% (37/58) of patients who were discharged from the hospital died during follow-up. The median follow-up time was 55 days (95% CI = 26.9-83.0). The overall mortality rate for the entire group during hospitalization and after hospital discharge was 80.8% (80/99). CONCLUSION: Fewer than 3 out of 10 hospitalized cancer patients requiring admission to the ICU were evaluated by the palliative care team despite having incurable cancer. The qSOFA score of patients at the time of the ICU consultation was the only risk factor for mortality during hospitalization. Future research efforts in Mexico should focus on earlier integration of palliation care with usual oncology care in incurable cancer patients.

Association of fever and antipyretic treatment with progressive organ dysfunction in sepsis: Prospective cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Whether fever and antipyretic treatment are related to progression of organ dysfunction (POD) in sepsis is currently not known. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of fever and antipyretic treatment with POD in sepsis. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients with sepsis. Maximum axillary temperature (T° Max), antipyretic drugs total dose and daily SOFA score were recorded. POD was defined as an increase ≥ 1 point on the SOFA score. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to evaluate the studied association. RESULTS: 305 patients were included: 163 were women (53.4%), with a SOFA score of 8 points (6-11); 130 participants (42.62%) had T° Max ≥ 38°C, and 76 (24.9%), POD. Mortality in patients with fever was 26.2% vs. 20% (p = 0.21), and with POD, 73.7% vs. 5.7% (p = 0.01). T° Max ≥ 39°C had an OR of 4.96 (95% CI = 1.97-12.47, p = 0.01); and the use of antipyretics, an OR of 1.04 (95% CI: 0.58-1.86, p = 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: An axillary T° Max ≥ 39°C is a risk factor for POD in sepsis. The use of antipyretics was not associated with POD.

INTRODUCCIÓN: No se conoce si la fiebre y el tratamiento antipirético se relacionan con progresión de la disfunción orgánica (PDO) en sepsis. OBJETIVO: Evaluar la asociación de la fiebre y el tratamiento antipirético con la PDO en sepsis. MÉTODOS: Estudio de cohorte prospectiva de pacientes con sepsis. Se registró temperatura axilar máxima (T° máx.), dosis total de fármacos antipiréticos y puntuación diaria de la escala SOFA. La PDO se definió como el incremento de SOFA ≥ 1 punto. Se utilizó un modelo de regresión logística multivariado para evaluar la asociación estudiada. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 305 pacientes: 163 mujeres (53.4 %) con puntuación SOFA de ocho puntos (6-11); 130 participantes (42.62 %) presentaron T° máx. ≥ 38 °C y 76 (24.9 %), PDO. La mortalidad en los pacientes con fiebre fue de 26.2 % versus 20 % sin fiebre (p = 0.21) y con PDO, de 73.7 % versus 5.7 % (p = 0.01). La T° máx. ≥ 39°C tuvo RM = 4.96 (IC 95 % = 1.97-12.47, p = 0.01) y el uso de antipiréticos, RM = 1.04 (IC 95 % = 0.58-1.86, p = 0.88). CONCLUSIONES: La T° máx. axilar ≥ 39°C es un factor de riesgo para PDO en sepsis. El uso de antipiréticos no se asoció a PDO.

Acute Stress in Health Workers during Two Consecutive Epidemic Waves of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has provoked generalized uncertainty around the world, with health workers experiencing anxiety, depression, burnout, insomnia, and stress. Although the effects of the pandemic on mental health may change as it evolves, the majority of reports have been web-based, cross-sectional studies. We performed a study assessing acute stress in frontline health workers during two consecutive epidemic waves. After screening for trait anxiety/depression and dissociative experiences, we evaluated changes in acute stress, considering resilience, state anxiety, burnout, depersonalization/derealization symptoms, and quality of sleep as cofactors. During the first epidemic wave (April 2020), health workers reported acute stress related to COVID-19, which was related to state anxiety. After the first epidemic wave, acute stress decreased, with no increase during the second epidemic wave (December 2020), and further decreased when vaccination started. During the follow-up (April 2020 to February 2021), the acute stress score was related to bad quality of sleep. However, acute stress, state anxiety, and burnout were all related to trait anxiety/depression, while the resilience score was invariant through time. Overall, the results emphasize the relevance of mental health screening before, during, and after an epidemic wave of infections, in order to enable coping during successive sanitary crises.

Outcomes of patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit in Mexico: A multicenter observational study.

BACKGROUND: As of June 15, 2020, a cumulative total of 7,823,289 confirmed cases of COVID-19 have been reported across 216 countries and territories worldwide. However, there is little information on the clinical characteristics and outcomes of critically ill patients with severe COVID-19 who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in Latin America. The present study evaluated the clinical characteristics and outcomes of critically ill patients with severe COVID-19 who were admitted to ICUs in Mexico. METHODS: This was a multicenter observational study that included 164 critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were admitted to 10 ICUs in Mexico, from April 1 to April 30, 2020. Demographic data, comorbid conditions, clinical presentation, treatment, and outcomes were collected and analyzed. The date of final follow-up was June 4, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients with severe COVID-19 were included in this study. The mean age of patients was 57.3 years (SD 13.7), 114 (69.5%) were men, and 6.0% were healthcare workers. Comorbid conditions were common in patients with critical COVID-19: 38.4% of patients had hypertension and 32.3% had diabetes. Compared to survivors, nonsurvivors were older and more likely to have diabetes, hypertension or other conditions. Patients presented to the hospital a median of 7 days (IQR 4.5-9) after symptom onset. The most common presenting symptoms were shortness of breath, fever, dry cough, and myalgias. One hundred percent of patients received invasive mechanical ventilation for a median time of 11 days (IQR 6-14). A total of 139 of 164 patients (89.4%) received vasopressors, and 24 patients (14.6%) received renal replacement therapy during hospitalization. Eighty-five (51.8%) patients died at or before 30 days, with a median survival of 25 days. Age (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08; p<0.001) and C-reactive protein levels upon ICU admission (1.008; 95% CI, 1.003-1.012; p<0.001) were associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death. ICU length of stay was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality risk (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.94; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This observational study of critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were admitted to the ICU in Mexico demonstrated that age and C-reactive protein level upon ICU admission were associated with in-hospital mortality, and the overall hospital mortality rate was high. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04336345.

Incidence of Delirium in Critically Ill Cancer Patients.

Objective: The aim of this study was to estimate the incidence of delirium and its risk factors among critically ill cancer patients in an intensive care unit (ICU). Materials and Methods: This is a prospective cohort study. The Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) was measured daily at morning to diagnose delirium by a physician. Delirium was diagnosed when the daily was positive during a patient's ICU stay. All patients were followed until they were discharged from the ICU. Using logistic regression, we estimated potential risk factors for developing delirium. The primary outcome was the development of ICU delirium. Results: There were 109 patients included in the study. Patients had a mean age of 48.6 ± 18.07 years, and the main reason for admission to the ICU was septic shock (40.4%). The incidence of delirium was 22.9%. The mortality among all subjects was 15.6%; the mortality rate in patients who developed delirium was 12%. The only variable that had an association with the development of delirium in the ICU was the days of use of mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.06; CI 95%: 0.99-1.13;p=0.07). Conclusion: Delirium is a frequent condition in critically ill cancer patients admitted to the ICU. The duration in days of mechanical ventilation is potential risk factors for developing delirium during an ICU stay. Delirium was not associated with a higher rate of mortality in this group of patients.

Usefulness of ultrasonographic measurement of the diameter of the inferior vena cava to predict responsiveness to intravascular fluid administration in patients with cancer.

We conducted an observational, longitudinal prospective study in which we measured the diameters of the inferior vena cava (IVC) of 47 patients using ultrasonography. The aim of our study was to assess the state of blood volume and to determine the percentage of patients who responded to intravascular volume expansion. Only 17 patients (36%) responded to fluid management. A higher number of responding patients had cardiovascular failure compared with nonresponders (82% vs. 50%, P = 0.03). Among the patients with cardiovascular failure, the probability of finding responders was 4.6 times higher than that of not finding responders (odds ratio, 4.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-19.6; P = 0.04). No significant difference was observed in the mortality rate between the two groups (11% vs. 23%, P = 0.46). In conclusion, responding to intravascular volume expansion had no impact on patient survival in the intensive care unit.

Clinical Weighting of Drug-Drug Interactions in Hospitalized Elderly.

Adverse drug reactions impact on patient health, effectiveness of pharmacological therapy and increased health care costs. This investigation intended to detect the most critical drug-drug interactions in hospitalized elderly patients, weighting clinical risk. We conducted a cross-sectional study between January and April 2014; all patients 70 years or older, hospitalized for >24 hr and prescribed at least one medication were included in the study. Drug-drug interactions were estimated by combining Stockley's, Hansten and Tatro drug interactions. Drug-drug interactions were weighted using a risk-analysis method based on failure modes, effects and criticality analysis. We calculated a criticality index for each drug involved in the drug-drug interactions based on the severity of the interaction mechanism, the frequency the drug was involved in drug-drug interactions and the risk of drug-drug interactions in patients with impaired renal function. The average number of drugs consumed in the hospital was 6 ± 2.69, involving 160 active ingredients. The most frequent were as follows: Furosemide, followed by Enalapril. Of drug-drug interactions, 2% were classified as contraindicated, 14% advised against and 83% advised caution during the hospital stay. Thirty-four drug-drug interactions were assessed, of which 23 were pharmacodynamic drug-drug interactions and 12 were pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (1 was both). The clinical risk calculated for each drug-drug interaction included heparins + non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or Digoxin + Calcium Gluconate, cases which are pharmacodynamic drug-drug interactions with agonist effect and clinical risk of bleeding, one of the most common clinical risks in the hospital. An index of clinical risk for drug-drug interactions can be calculated based on severity by the interaction mechanism, the frequency that the drug is involved in drug-drug interactions and the risk of drug-drug interactions in an elderly patient with impaired renal function.