Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add filters

Database
Main subject
Document Type
Year range
1.
Pharmaceuticals (Basel) ; 15(1)2022 Jan 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613930

ABSTRACT

Data from several cohorts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suggest that the most common comorbidities for severe COVID-19 disease are the elderly, high blood pressure, and diabetes; however, it is not currently known whether the previous use of certain drugs help or hinder recovery. This study aims to explore the association of previous hospitalisation use of medication on the mortality of COVID-19 disease. A retrospective case-control from two hospitals in Madrid, Spain, included all patients aged 18 years or above hospitalised with a diagnosis of COVID-19. A Propensity Score matching (PSM) analysis was performed. Confounding variables were considered to be age, sex, and the number of comorbidities. Finally, 3712 patients were included. Of these, 687 (18.5%) patients died (cases). The 22,446 medicine trademarks used previous to admission were classified according to the ATC, obtaining 689 final drugs; all of them were included in PSM analysis. Eleven drugs displayed a reduction in mortality: azithromycin, bemiparine, budesonide-formoterol fumarate, cefuroxime, colchicine, enoxaparin, ipratropium bromide, loratadine, mepyramine theophylline acetate, oral rehydration salts, and salbutamol sulphate. Eight final drugs displayed an increase in mortality: acetylsalicylic acid, digoxin, folic acid, mirtazapine, linagliptin, enalapril, atorvastatin, and allopurinol. Medication associated with survival (anticoagulants, antihistamines, azithromycin, bronchodilators, cefuroxime, colchicine, and inhaled corticosteroids) may be candidates for future clinical trials. Drugs associated with mortality show an interaction with the underlying conditions.

2.
Cir Esp (Engl Ed) ; 99(9): 660-665, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506383

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Proctologic issues entail a frequent reason for consultation in the emergency department (ED). We aim to analyze how the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has impacted in the demand for proctological consultations. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Descriptive comparative retrospective study of cross-sectional cohorts of patients attending the ED for proctological complaints from March to April in 2020 and 2019. Demographic variables, comorbidities, reasons for consultation and diagnosis, treatment and readmission were included. Four periods were analyzed according to the different stages of the pandemic derived limitations. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients were reviewed, 58 in 2020 and 133 in 2019 with an average age of 48 years (SD 20.1) and 112 (58.6%) males. The average number of daily consultations was 2.18 patients in 2019 versus 0.95 in 2020 (p=0.025) meaning a 56% reduction in consultations for proctological reasons. This difference in average consultations was significant in both periods of lockout (p=0.001) and previous de-escalation (p=0.014). The diagnosis distribution was similar between both periods; however, perianal abscesses doubled their rate in 2020, 22.4% versus 11.3% (p=0.045). There was an increasing need for surgery, 31% vs 15% (p=0.011) with no difference in outpatients regimen after emergency surgery (12.5% vs 7.5%, p=0.201). Three patients in 2020 required readmission to the ED (5.2% vs 12.9%, p=0.086). CONCLUSION: There was a decrease of a 56% in proctologic emergency consultation, however, the need for surgery was twice more frequent during the study period. Reflection on the use of emergencies for proctological reasons is warranted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Chin Med J (Engl) ; 135(2): 187-193, 2021 Oct 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1494039

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In-hospital mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is high. Simple prognostic indices are needed to identify patients at high-risk of COVID-19 health outcomes. We aimed to determine the usefulness of the CONtrolling NUTritional status (CONUT) index as a potential prognostic indicator of mortality in COVID-19 patients upon hospital admission. METHODS: Our study design is of a retrospective observational study in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients. In addition to descriptive statistics, a Kaplan-Meier mortality analysis and a Cox regression were performed, as well as receiver operating curve (ROC). RESULTS: From February 5, 2020 to January 21, 2021, there was a total of 2969 admissions for COVID-19 at our hospital, corresponding to 2844 patients. Overall, baseline (within 4 days of admission) CONUT index could be scored for 1627 (57.2%) patients. Patients' age was 67.3 ±â€Š16.5 years and 44.9% were women. The CONUT severity distribution was: 194 (11.9%) normal (0-1); 769 (47.2%) light (2-4); 585 (35.9%) moderate (5-8); and 79 (4.9%) severe (9-12). Mortality of 30 days after admission was 3.1% in patients with normal risk CONUT, 9.0% light, 22.7% moderate, and 40.5% in those with severe CONUT (P < 0.05). An increased risk of death associated with a greater baseline CONUT stage was sustained in a multivariable Cox regression model (P < 0.05). An increasing baseline CONUT stage was associated with a longer duration of admission, a greater requirement for the use of non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation, and other clinical outcomes (all P < 0.05). The ROC of CONUT for mortality had an area under the curve (AUC) and 95% confidence interval of 0.711 (0.676-0746). CONCLUSION: The CONUT index upon admission is potentially a reliable and independent prognostic indicator of mortality and length of hospitalization in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Middle Aged , Nutrition Assessment , Nutritional Status , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Cir Esp (Engl Ed) ; 2020 Oct 23.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-932971

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Proctologic issues entail a frequent reason for consultation in the emergency department (ED). We aim to analyze how the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has impacted in the demand for proctological consultations. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Descriptive comparative retrospective study of cross-sectional cohorts of patients attending the ED for proctological complaints from March to April in 2020 and 2019. Demographic variables, comorbidities, reasons for consultation and diagnosis, treatment and readmission were included. Four periods were analyzed according to the different stages of the pandemic derived limitations. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients were reviewed, 58 in 2020 and 133 in 2019 with an average age of 48 years (SD 20.1) and 112 (58.6%) males. The average number of daily consultations was 2.18 patients in 2019 versus 0.95 in 2020 (p=0.025) meaning a 56% reduction in consultations for proctological reasons. This difference in average consultations was significant in both periods of lockout (p=0.001) and previous de-escalation (p=0.014). The diagnosis distribution was similar between both periods; however, perianal abscesses doubled their rate in 2020, 22.4% versus 11.3% (p=0.045). There was an increasing need for surgery, 31% vs 15% (p=0.011) with no difference in outpatients regimen after emergency surgery (12.5% vs 7.5%, p=0.201). Three patients in 2020 required readmission to the ED (5.2% vs 12.9%, p=0.086). CONCLUSION: There was a decrease of a 56% in proctologic emergency consultation, however, the need for surgery was twice more frequent during the study period. Reflection on the use of emergencies for proctological reasons is warranted.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL