Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 2 de 2
Filtre
Ajouter des filtres








Gamme d'année
1.
Clinics ; 69(10): 666-671, 10/2014. tab, graf
Article Dans Anglais | LILACS | ID: lil-730466

Résumé

OBJECTIVES: Cardiology referral is common for patients admitted for non-cardiac diseases. Recommendations from cardiologists may involve complex and aggressive treatments that could be ignored or denied by other physicians. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients who were given recommendations during cardiology referrals and to examine the clinical outcomes of patients who did not follow the recommendations. METHODS: We enrolled 589 consecutive patients who received in-hospital cardiology consultations. Data on recommendations, implementation of suggestions and outcomes were collected. RESULTS: Regarding adherence of the referring service to the recommendations, 77% of patients were classified in the adherence group and 23% were classified in the non-adherence group. Membership in the non-adherence group (p<0.001; odds ratio: 10.25; 95% CI: 4.45-23.62) and advanced age (p = 0.017; OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01-1.07) were associated with unfavorable outcomes. Multivariate analysis identified four independent predictors of adherence to recommendations: follow-up notes in the medical chart (p<0.001; OR: 2.43; 95% CI: 1.48-4.01); verbal reinforcement (p = 0.001; OR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.23-2.81); a small number of recommendation (p = 0.001; OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.80-0.94); and a younger patient age (p = 0.002; OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Poor adherence to cardiology referral recommendations was associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes. Follow-up notes in the medical chart, verbal reinforcement, a limited number of recommendations and a patient age were associated with greater adherence to recommendations. .


Sujets)
Sujet âgé , Femelle , Humains , Mâle , Adulte d'âge moyen , Cardiologie/normes , Adhésion aux directives/statistiques et données numériques , Orientation vers un spécialiste/statistiques et données numériques , Facteurs âges , Hôpitaux universitaires/statistiques et données numériques , Unités de soins intensifs , Modèles logistiques , Odds ratio , Études prospectives , Enquêtes et questionnaires , Résultat thérapeutique
2.
Rev. Assoc. Med. Bras. (1992) ; 58(4): 505-512, July-Aug. 2012. tab
Article Dans Anglais | LILACS | ID: lil-646896

Résumé

When dealing with surgical patients, a perioperative evaluation is essential to anticipate complications and institute measures to reduce the risks. Several algorithms and exams have been used to identify postoperative cardiovascular events, which account for more than 50% of perioperative mortality. However, they are far from ideal. Some of these algorithms and exams were proposed before important advances in cardiology, at a time when pharmacological risk reduction strategies for surgical patients were not available. New biomarkers and exams, such as C-reactive protein, brain natriuretic peptide, and multislice computed tomography have been used in cardiology and have provided important prognostic information. The ankle-brachial index is another significant marker of atherosclerosis. However, specific information regarding the perioperative context of all these methods is still needed. The objective of this article is to evaluate cardiovascular risk prediction models after noncardiac surgery.


Sujets)
Humains , Maladies cardiovasculaires/diagnostic , Soins périopératoires/normes , Complications postopératoires/prévention et contrôle , Algorithmes , Index de pression systolique cheville-bras , Marqueurs biologiques/analyse , Peptide natriurétique cérébral/analyse , Appréciation des risques
SÉLECTION CITATIONS
Détails de la recherche