A case study on the implementation of quality and comprehensive indicators set in routine diabetes care.

INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes is a major public health issue in Mexico due to its high prevalence and its projection for the coming years for this disease. Findings on multidisciplinary care related to chronic diseases have proven effective, based on measurement of patient-centered outcomes, The Center of Comprehensive Care for Patients with Diabetes (CAIPaDi) is a multidisciplinary program focused on reducing diabetes complications. This case study aims to illustrate the results of implementing health outcomes measurements and demonstrate the beneficial effects of establishing a comprehensive model of care through a patient-centered approach. METHODS: A descriptive analysis of the comprehensive care indicators of patients with type 2 diabetes treated in the CAIPaDi program between 2013 and 2023 was conducted. The results were structured according to the standard set of outcomes for diabetes proposed by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurements (ICHOM). RESULTS: The baseline and prospective registration of consultations was completed for five years, complying with 25 of the 26 indicators of the ICHOM set. In diabetes control, 56.5% of patients had A1c ≤ 7%, 87.9% had BP ≤ 130/80 mmHg, 60.9% had LDL-cholesterol < 100 mg/dl, and obesity rates decreased from 42.19% to 30.6% during annual consultations. Fewer years of diagnosis before the first visit is key to overall improvement in program adherence (P = 0.02). In acute events, a hyperglycemic crisis occurred in only two cases and severe hypoglycemia episodes in 8 patients. For chronic complications, no lower limb amputations occurred. Cardiovascular outcomes occurred in < 1%. Periodontal disease was analyzed, and periodontitis decreased from 82.9% to 78.7%. Mortality reports were low, with COVID-19 being the main cause of death. Patient-reported outcomes demonstrated reductions in anxiety, depression, and diabetes distress during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Registering quality-of-care indicators is feasible in a comprehensive care program. It allows improving the medical, mental health, and lifestyle outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes and provides relevant data for planning health programs. A quick diagnosis before program adherence is crucial for overall improvement in patients.

Correction: In-hospital mortality from severe COVID-19 in a tertiary care center in Mexico City; causes of death, risk factors and the impact of hospital saturation.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245772.].

Adverse Effects Associated With the Use of Antimalarials During The COVID-19 Pandemic in a Tertiary Care Center in Mexico City.

Background: Antimalarial drugs were widely used as experimental therapies against COVID-19 in the initial stages of the pandemic. Despite multiple randomized controlled trials demonstrating unfavorable outcomes in both efficacy and adverse effects, antimalarial drugs are still prescribed in developing countries, especially in those experiencing recurrent COVID-19 crises (India and Brazil). Therefore, real-life experience and pharmacovigilance studies describing the use and side effects of antimalarials for COVID-19 in developing countries are still relevant. Objective: To describe the adverse effects associated with the use of antimalarial drugs in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at a reference center in Mexico City. Methods: We integrated a retrospective cohort with all adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia from March 13th, 2020, to May 17th, 2020. We compared the baseline characteristics (demographic and clinical) and the adverse effects between the groups of patients treated with and without antimalarial drugs. The mortality analysis was performed in 491 patients who received optimal care and were not transferred to other institutions (210 from the antimalarial group and 281 from the other group). Results: We included 626 patients from whom 38% (n = 235) received an antimalarial drug. The mean age was 51.2 ± 13.6 years, and 64% were males. At baseline, compared with the group treated with antimalarials, the group that did not receive antimalarials had more dyspnea (82 vs. 73%, p = 0.017) and cyanosis (5.3 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.009), higher respiratory rate (median of 28 vs. 24 bpm, p < 0.001), and lower oxygen saturation (median of 83 vs. 87%, p < 0.001). In the group treated with antimalarials, 120 patients had two EKG evaluations, from whom 12% (n = 16) prolonged their QTc from baseline in more than 50 ms, and six developed a ventricular arrhythmia. Regarding the trajectories of the liver function tests over time, no significant differences were found for the change in the mean value per day between the two groups. Among patients who received optimal care, the mortality was 16% (33/210) in those treated with antimalarials and 15% (41/281) in those not receiving antimalarials (RR 1.08, 95% 0.75-1.64, and adjusted RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.69-1.82). Conclusion: The adverse events in patients with COVID-19 treated with antimalarials were similar to those who did not receive antimalarials at institutions with rigorous pharmacological surveillance. However, they do not improve survival in patients who receive optimal medical care.

In-hospital mortality from severe COVID-19 in a tertiary care center in Mexico City; causes of death, risk factors and the impact of hospital saturation.

BACKGROUND: As the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has remained in Latin America, Mexico has become the third country with the highest death rate worldwide. Data regarding in-hospital mortality and its risk factors, as well as the impact of hospital overcrowding in Latin America has not been thoroughly explored. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled consecutive adult patients hospitalized with severe confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia at a SARS-CoV-2 referral center in Mexico City from February 26th, 2020, to June 5th, 2020. A total of 800 patients were admitted with confirmed diagnosis, mean age was 51.9 ± 13.9 years, 61% were males, 85% were either obese or overweight, 30% had hypertension and 26% type 2 diabetes. From those 800, 559 recovered (69.9%) and 241 died (30.1%). Among survivors, 101 (18%) received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and 458 (82%) were managed outside the intensive care unit (ICU); mortality in the ICU was 49%. From the non-survivors, 45.6% (n = 110) did not receive full support due to lack of ICU bed availability. Within this subgroup the main cause of death was acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in 95% of the cases, whereas among the non-survivors who received full (n = 105) support the main cause of death was septic shock (45%) followed by ARDS (29%). The main risk factors associated with in-hospital death were male sex (RR 2.05, 95% CI 1.34-3.12), obesity (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.14-2.32)-in particular morbid obesity (RR 3.38, 95%CI 1.63-7.00)-and oxygen saturation < 80% on admission (RR 4.8, 95%CI 3.26-7.31). CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found similar in-hospital and ICU mortality, as well as risk factors for mortality, compared to previous reports. However, 45% of the patients who did not survive justified admission to ICU but did not receive IMV / ICU care due to the unavailability of ICU beds. Furthermore, mortality rate over time was mainly due to the availability of ICU beds, indirectly suggesting that overcrowding was one of the main factors that contributed to hospital mortality.