Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add filters

Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
researchsquare; 2024.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-3928486.v1

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic caused rapid shifts in the workflow of many health services, but evidence of how this affected multidisciplinary care settings is limited. We propose a Process Mining approach that utilises timestamped data from Electronic Health Records to compare care provider patterns across pandemic waves.  Methods: We collected routine events from Scottish hospital episodes in adults with COVID-19 status and linked health provider inputs to generate standardised treatment logs. Conformance checking metrics were used to select the optimal model (Inductive Miner infrequent [IMi]) for downstream analysis. Visual diagrams from the discovered Petri Nets indicated the interactions on pre-coded provider and activity-level subsets. We used cross-log conformance checking and graph similarity to measure distances between adverse and less adverse groups across pandemic waves.  Results: We included 1,153 patients with COVID-19 (302 [26%] in Wave 1 and 851 [74%] in Wave 2) with 55,212 relevant care provider events. At the conformance checking stage, the IMi model, achieved good log fitness (LF=0.95) and generalisation (G=0.89), but limited precision (PR=0.27) across all granularity levels. More structured care procedures in Wave 1 were present, compared to mixed multidisciplinary patterns in Wave 2. Care activities differed in patients with extended stay (GED=348, PR=0.231 vs GED=197, PR=0.429 in shorter stays). Patients in out-of-hours care and intensive therapy were linked with more standardised patterns.  Conclusion: Process Mining can be incorporated alongside clinical oversight to provide visual and quantitative comparisons of care interactions in COVID-19 episodes and enhance further research in complex cases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Seizures
2.
researchsquare; 2022.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-2222776.v1

ABSTRACT

Background: To guarantee the safety of the public, clinicians and patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital visits were severely restricted internationally. There is limited data on the precise impact of these visiting restrictions on Intensive Care Unit clinicians. Our objectives therefore were, to explore the impact of family visitation restrictions on clinicians and care and describe innovation and areas for potential improvement. Methods: A qualitative approach, using focus groups was employed. We recruited members of the multi-disciplinary team from Spain, France and the UK. Framework analysis was used to synthesize and interpret data. Results: In total, 28 staff from multiple international sites contributed to data across six focus groups: 12 from the UK, 9 from France and 7 from Spain. In relation to the key aims, we derived four themes: the emergence of new technologies; relationships and rapport establishment, communication challenges and end of life care provision. Across each theme, the overarching concepts of clinician emotional exhaustion and emotional distress emerged alongside the negative impact on job satisfaction. Conclusion: The impact of COVID-19 family visitation restrictions is far reaching. Future research should examine the wider impact of family presence in the ICU.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
3.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.03.18.21253888

ABSTRACT

Structured Abstract Objectives: The long-term consequences of severe Covid-19 requiring hospital admission are not well characterised. The objective of this study was to establish the long-term effects of Covid-19 following hospitalisation and the impact these may have on patient reported outcome measures. Design: A multicentre, prospective cohort study with at least 3 months follow-up of participants admitted to hospital between 5th February 2020 and 5th October 2020. Setting: 31 hospitals in the United Kingdom. Participants: 327 hospitalised participants discharged alive from hospital with confirmed/high likelihood SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main outcome measures and comparisons: The primary outcome was self-reported recovery at least ninety days after initial Covid-19 symptom onset. Secondary outcomes included new symptoms, new or increased disability (Washington group short scale), breathlessness (MRC Dyspnoea scale) and quality of life (EQ5D-5L). We compared these outcome measures across age, comorbidity status and in-hospital Covid-19 severity to identify groups at highest risk of developing long-term difficulties. Multilevel logistic and linear regression models were built to adjust for the effects of patient and centre level risk factors on these outcomes. Results: In total 53.7% (443/824) contacted participants responded, yielding 73.8% (327/443) responses with follow-up of 90 days or more from symptom onset. The median time between symptom onset of initial illness and completing the participant questionnaire was 222 days (Interquartile range (IQR) 189 to 269 days). In total, 54.7% (179/327) of participants reported they did not feel fully recovered. Persistent symptoms were reported by 93.3% (305/325) of participants, with fatigue the most common (82.8%, 255/308), followed by breathlessness (53.5%, 175/327). 46.8% (153/327) reported an increase in MRC dyspnoea scale of at least one grade. New or worse disability was reported by 24.2% (79/327) of participants. Overall (EQ5D-5L) summary index was significantly worse at the time of follow-up (median difference 0.1 points on a scale of 0 to 1, IQR: -0.2 to 0.0). Females under the age of 50 years were five times less likely to report feeling recovered (adjusted OR 5.09, 95% CI 1.64 to 15.74), were more likely to have greater disability (adjusted OR 4.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 15.94), twice as likely to report worse fatigue (adjusted OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.31) and seven times more likely to become more breathless (adjusted OR 7.15, 95% CI 2.24 to 22.83) than men of the same age. Conclusions: Survivors of Covid-19 experienced long-term symptoms, new disability, increased breathlessness, and reduced quality of life. These findings were present even in young, previously healthy working age adults, and were most common in younger females. Policymakers should fund further research to identify effective treatments for long-Covid and ensure healthcare, social care and welfare support is available for individuals with long-Covid.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dyspnea , Fatigue
4.
ssrn; 2020.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-SSRN | ID: ppzbmed-10.2139.ssrn.3705271

ABSTRACT

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to significant respiratory failure with between 14% and 18% of hospitalised patients requiring critical care admission. This study describes the impact of socioeconomic deprivation on 30-day survival following critical care admission for COVID-19, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on critical care capacity in Scotland.Methods: This cohort study used linked national hospital records including ICU, virology testing and national death records to identify and describe patients with COVID-19 admitted to a critical care unit in Scotland. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the impact of deprivation on 30-day mortality. Critical care capacity was described by reporting the percentage of baseline ICU bed utilisation required.Results: There were 735 patients with COVID-19 admitted to critical care units across Scotland from 1/3/2020 to 20/6/2020. There was a higher proportion of patients from more deprived areas, with 183 admissions (24.9%) from the most deprived quintile and 100 (13.6%) from the least deprived quintile. 30-day mortality was 34.8%. After adjusting for age, sex and ethnicity, mortality was significantly higher in patients from the most deprived quintile (OR 1.97, 95%CI 1.13, 3.41, p=0.016). ICUs serving populations with higher levels of deprivation spent a greater amount of time over their baseline ICU bed capacity.Conclusion: Patients with COVID-19 living in areas with greater socioeconomic deprivation had a higher frequency of critical care admission and a higher adjusted 30-day mortality. ICUs in health boards with higher levels of socioeconomic deprivation had both higher peak occupancy and longer duration of occupancy over normal maximum capacity.Funding Statement: None.Declaration of Interests: All authors declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; NL is Director of Research, Intensive Care Society; JM is funded by a THIS.Institute (University of Cambridge) Research Fellowship (PD-2019-02-16). Ethics Approval Statement: The Scottish Intensive Care Society Audit Group in Public Health Scotland has a legislative remit to process personal data in relation to public health. Linkage to additional datasets was approved following scrutiny by the Public Benefit and Privacy Panel for Health and Social Care (ref 1920-0093). Access and use of the data for the purpose of this work were approved following a Public Health Scotland information governance review of linking additional internal datasets to identify patients with COVID-19. Only analysts working in Public Health Scotland had access to the linked patient data which could only be accessed via an NHS secure network.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency
5.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.08.26.20180950

ABSTRACT

Introduction Very little is known about possible clinical sequelae that may persist after resolution of the acute Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). A recent longitudinal cohort from Italy including 143 patients recovered after hospitalisation with COVID-19 reported that 87% had at least one ongoing symptom at 60 day follow-up. Early indications suggest that patients with COVID-19 may need even more psychological support than typical ICU patients. The assessment of risk factors for longer term consequences requires a longitudinal study linked to data on pre-existing conditions and care received during the acute phase of illness. Methods and analysis This is an international open-access prospective, observational multi-site study. It will enrol patients following a diagnosis of COVID-19. Tier 1 is developed for following up patients day 28 post-discharge, additionally at 3 to 6 months intervals. This module can be used to identify sub-sets of patients experiencing specific symptomatology or syndromes for further follow up. A Tier 2 module will be developed for in-clinic, in-depth follow up. The primary aim is to characterise physical consequences in patients post-COVID-19. Secondary aim includes estimating the frequency of and risk factors for post-COVID- 19 medical sequalae, psychosocial consequences and post-COVID-19 mortality. A subset of patients will have sampling to characterize longer term antibody, innate and cell-mediated immune responses to SARS-CoV-2. Ethics and dissemination This collaborative, open-access study aims to characterize the frequency of and risk factors for long-term consequences and characterise the immune response over time in patients following a diagnosis of COVID-19 and facilitate standardized and longitudinal data collection globally. The outcomes of this study will inform strategies to prevent long term consequences; inform clinical management, direct rehabilitation, and inform public health management to reduce overall morbidity and improve outcomes of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL