Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Med Clin (Engl Ed) ; 159(1): 19-26, 2022 Jul 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2221135

ABSTRACT

Purpose: There is growing evidence regarding the imaging findings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in lung ultrasound (LUS), however the use of a combined prognostic and triage tool has yet to be explored.To determine the impact of the LUS in the prediction of the mortality of patients with highly suspected or confirmed COVID-19.The secondary outcome was to calculate a score with LUS findings with other variables to predict hospital admission and emergency department (ED) discharge. Material and methods: Prospective study performed in the ED of three academic hospitals. Patients with highly suspected or confirmed COVID-19 underwent a LUS examination and laboratory tests. Results: A total of 228 patients were enrolled between March and September 2020. The mean age was 61.9 years (Standard Deviation - SD 21.1). The most common findings in LUS was a right posteroinferior isolated irregular pleural line (53.9%, 123 patients). A logistic regression model was calculated, including age over 70 years, C-reactive protein (CRP) over 70 mg/L and a lung score over 7 to predict mortality, hospital admission and discharge from the ED. We obtained a predictive model with a sensitivity of 56.8% and a specificity of 87.6%, with an AUC of 0.813 [p < 0.001]. Conclusions: The combination of LUS, clinical and laboratory findings in this easy to apply "rule of 7" showed excellent performance to predict hospital admission and mortality.


Objetivo: Existe una evidencia creciente con respecto a los hallazgos de imagen de la enfermedad por coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) en la ecografía pulmonar (LUS), sin embargo, aún no se ha explorado el uso de una herramienta combinada de pronóstico y triaje.El objetivo principal de este estudio fue determinar el impacto de la LUS en la predicción de la mortalidad de los pacientes con sospecha de afectación pulmonar por COVID-19. El objetivo secundario fue calcular una puntuación con los hallazgos del LUS con otras variables para predecir el ingreso hospitalario y el alta del servicio de urgencias (SU). Material y métodos: Estudio prospectivo realizado en urgencias de tres hospitales académicos, en pacientes con sospecha de COVID-19 o confirmación de esta, a los que se sometió a un examen de LUS y pruebas de laboratorio. Resultados: Se inscribieron un total de 228 pacientes entre marzo y septiembre de 2020. La edad media fue de 61,9 años (DE 21,1). El hallazgo más común en la LUS fue la irregularidad pleural posteroinferior derecha (53,9%, 123 pacientes). Se calculó un modelo de regresión logística, que incluyó la edad mayor de 70 años, proteína C reactiva (PCR) mayor de 70 mg/L y puntuación de afectación pulmonar mediante LUS score superior a 7 para predecir la mortalidad, el ingreso hospitalario y el alta del SU. Se obtuvo una sensibilidad del 56,8% y una especificidad del 87,6%, con un AUC de 0,813 [p < 0,001] para dicho modelo predictivo, en materia de mortalidad. Conclusiones: La combinación de LUS, hallazgos clínicos y de laboratorio en esta «regla de 7¼ de fácil aplicación se mostró de utilidad para predecir el ingreso hospitalario y la mortalidad.

2.
Rev Invest Clin ; 74(3): 135-146, 2022 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1836372

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Information is needed on the safety and efficacy of direct discharge from the emergency department (ED) of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study were to study the variables associated with discharge from the ED in patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, and study ED revisits related to COVID-19 at 30 days (EDR30d). METHODS: Multicenter study of the SIESTA cohort including 1198 randomly selected COVID patients in 61 EDs of Spanish medical centers from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. We collected baseline and related characteristics of the acute episode and calculated the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for ED discharge. In addition, we analyzed the variables related to EDR30d in discharged patients. RESULTS: We analyzed 859 patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, 84 (9.8%) of whom weredischarged from the ED. The variables independently associated with discharge were being a woman (aOR 1.890; 95%CI 1.176 3.037), age < 60 years (aOR 2.324; 95%CI 1.353-3.990), and lymphocyte count > 1200/mm3 (aOR 4.667; 95%CI 1.045-20.839). The EDR30d of the ED discharged group was 40.0%, being lower in women (aOR 0.368; 95%CI 0.142-0.953). A totalof 130 hospitalized patients died (16.8%) as did two in the group discharged from the ED (2.4%) (OR 0.121; 95%CI 0.029-0.498). CONCLUSION: Discharge from the ED in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was infrequent and was associated with few variables of the episode. The EDR30d was high, albeit with a low mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia , Cohort Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies
3.
Med Clin (Barc) ; 159(1): 19-26, 2022 07 08.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1386249

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: There is growing evidence regarding the imaging findings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in lung ultrasound (LUS), however the use of a combined prognostic and triage tool has yet to be explored. To determine the impact of the LUS in the prediction of the mortality of patients with highly suspected or confirmed COVID-19.The secondary outcome was to calculate a score with LUS findings with other variables to predict hospital admission and emergency department (ED) discharge. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective study performed in the ED of three academic hospitals. Patients with highly suspected or confirmed COVID-19 underwent a LUS examination and laboratory tests. RESULTS: A total of 228 patients were enrolled between March and September 2020. The mean age was 61.9 years (Standard Deviation - SD 21.1). The most common findings in LUS was a right posteroinferior isolated irregular pleural line (53.9%, 123 patients). A logistic regression model was calculated, including age over 70 years, C-reactive protein (CRP) over 70mg/L and a lung score over 7 to predict mortality, hospital admission and discharge from the ED. We obtained a predictive model with a sensitivity of 56.8% and a specificity of 87.6%, with an AUC of 0.813 [p<0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of LUS, clinical and laboratory findings in this easy to apply "rule of 7" showed excellent performance to predict hospital admission and mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Ultrasonography/methods
4.
J Patient Saf ; 17(4): 323-330, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1231053

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although recommendations to prevent COVID-19 healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) have been proposed, data on their effectivity are currently limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the effectivity of a program of control and prevention of COVID-19 in an academic general hospital in Spain. METHODS: We captured the number of COVID-19 cases and the type of contact that occurred in hospitalized patients and healthcare personnel (HCP). To evaluate the impact of the continuous use of a surgical mask among HCP, the number of patients with COVID-19 HAIs and accumulated incidence of HCP with COVID-19 was compared between the preintervention and intervention periods. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-two patients with COVID-19 have been admitted to the hospital. Seven of them had an HAI origin (6 in the preintervention period and 1 in the intervention period). One hundred forty-two HCP were infected with SARS-CoV-2. Of them, 22 (15.5%) were attributed to healthcare (2 in the emergency department and none in the critical care departments), and 120 (84.5%) were attributed to social relations in the workplace or during their non-work-related personal interactions. The accumulated incidence during the preintervention period was 22.3 for every 1000 HCP and 8.2 for every 1000 HCP during the intervention period. The relative risk was 0.37 (95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.55) and the attributable risk was -0.014 (95% confidence interval, -0.020 to -0.009). CONCLUSIONS: A program of control and prevention of HAIs complemented with the recommendation for the continuous use of a surgical mask in the workplace and social environments of HCP effectively decreased the risk of COVID-19 HAIs in admitted patients and HCP.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Male , Masks/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Personnel, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Program Evaluation , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Spain/epidemiology
6.
Am J Prev Med ; 59(6): e221-e229, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-718611

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: This study examines the frequency, associated factors, and characteristics of healthcare personnel coronavirus disease 2019 cases in a healthcare department that comprises a tertiary hospital and its associated 12 primary healthcare centers. METHODS: This study included healthcare personnel that showed symptoms or were in contact with a coronavirus disease 2019 case patient from March 2, 2020 to April 19, 2020. Their evolution and characteristics (age, sex, professional category, type of contact) were recorded. Correlations between the different characteristics and risk of developing coronavirus disease 2019 and severe coronavirus disease 2019 were analyzed using chi-square tests. Their magnitudes were quantified with ORs, AORs, and their 95% CIs using a logistic regression model. RESULTS: Of the 3,900 healthcare professionals in the department, 1,791 (45.9%) showed symptoms or were part of a contact tracing study. The prevalence of those with symptoms was 20.1% (784/3,900; 95% CI=18.8, 21.4), with coronavirus disease 2019 was 4.0% (156/3,900; 95% CI=3.4, 4.6), and with severe coronavirus disease 2019 was 0.5% (18/3,900; 95% CI=0.2, 0.7). The frequency of coronavirus disease 2019 in symptomatic healthcare personnel with a nonprotected exposure was 22.8% (112/491) and 13.7% (40/293) in those with a protected exposure (AOR=2.2, 95% CI=1.2, 3.9). The service in which the healthcare personnel performed their activity was not significantly associated with being diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019. A total of 26.3% (10/38) of male healthcare personnel with coronavirus disease 2019 required hospitalization, compared with 6.8% (8/118) among female healthcare personnel (OR=4.9, 95% CI=1.8, 13.6). CONCLUSIONS: A surveillance and monitoring program centred on healthcare personnel enables an understanding of the risk factors that lead to coronavirus disease 2019 among this population. This knowledge allows the refinement of the strategies for disease control and prevention in healthcare personnel during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19 , Contact Tracing/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Occupations , Pandemics , Public Health Surveillance/methods , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Sex Factors , Spain/epidemiology , Tertiary Care Centers
7.
Emergencias ; 32(4): 253-257, 2020.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-659492

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To analyze clinical, laboratory, and radiologic findings and final health outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To compare them to findings and outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism without COVID-19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicenter, observational, retrospective study in 4 Spanish hospital emergency departments (EDs) from January 15 to April 15, 2020. Cases were located by reviewing all ED requests for pulmonary computed tomography angiography (CTA) procedures. Clinical, laboratory, and radiologic findings; medical histories and comorbidity; risk factors; and outcomes were compared between the 2 groups of patients (with or without COVID-19). RESULTS: A total of 399 CTAs were ordered; 88 pulmonary embolisms were diagnosed, 28 of them (32%) in patients with COVID-19. This group had more men, and a history of thromboembolic disease was more common. We found no between-group differences in clinical presentation, laboratory, or radiologic findings; nor were there differences in final outcomes. In-hospital mortality was 7% (2 cases) in patients with COVID-19 and 17% (10 cases) in patients without the virus (odds ratio for death in patients with pulmonary embolism and COVID-19, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.08-1.89). CONCLUSION: We found no clinically important differences in the clinical, laboratory, or radiologic findings between patients with or without COVID-19 who were treated for pulmonary embolism in our hospital EDs. Final outcomes also did not differ.


OBJETIVO: Analizar las características clínicas, analíticas, radiológicas y los resultados finales de salud en una cohorte de pacientes con embolia pulmonar (EP) y COVID-19, y compararlas con un grupo de pacientes con EP sin COVID-19. METODO: Estudio multicéntrico, observacional y retrospectivo realizado en cuatro servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) españoles del 15 de enero al 15 de abril de 2020. La detección de EP se hizo mediante la revisión de todas las angiografías por tomografía computarizada (angioTC) pulmonares solicitadas desde los SUH. Se han analizado dos grupos de pacientes con EP, con o sin enfermedad por COVID-19, y se comparan las características clínicas, analíticas, radiológicas, antecedentes y comorbilidad, factores de riesgo y resultados finales. RESULTADOS: Se realizaron 399 angioTC y se diagnosticaron 88 EP, 28 (32%) en pacientes con COVID-19. Estos pacientes fueron con más frecuencia hombres y tenían más antecedentes de enfermedad tromboembólica previa. No hubo diferencias en la presentación clínica, características analíticas o radiológicas ni en los resultados finales entre ambos grupos. La mortalidad intrahospitalaria fue del 7% (2 casos) en pacientes COVID y del 17% (10 casos) en pacientes sin COVID (OR de muerte en pacientes COVID con EP: 0,38, IC 95%: 0,08-1,89). CONCLUSIONES: No se han observado diferencias clínicamente relevantes en las características clínicas, analíticas, radiológicas y los resultados finales de salud en una cohorte de pacientes con EP y COVID-19 respecto a los pacientes con EP sin esta enfermedad atendidos en los SUH.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnostic imaging , Aged , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Computed Tomography Angiography/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation, Intratracheal , Length of Stay , Male , Odds Ratio , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pulmonary Embolism/blood , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Pulmonary Embolism/mortality , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology
8.
Emergencias (Sant Vicenç dels Horts) ; 32(4):253-257, 2020.
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: covidwho-655390

ABSTRACT

OBJETIVO: Analizar las características clínicas, analíticas, radiológicas y los resultados finales de salud en una cohorte de pacientes con embolia pulmonar (EP) y COVID-19, y compararlas con un grupo de pacientes con EP sin COVID-19. MÉTODO: Estudio multicéntrico, observacional y retrospectivo realizado en cuatro servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) españoles del 15 de enero al 15 de abril de 2020. La detección de EP se hizo mediante la revisión de todas las angiografías por tomografía computarizada (angioTC) pulmonares solicitadas desde los SUH. Se han analizado dos grupos de pacientes con EP, con o sin enfermedad por COVID-19, y se comparan las características clínicas, analíticas, radiológicas, antecedentes y comorbilidad, factores de riesgo y resultados finales. RESULTADOS: Se realizaron 399 angioTC y se diagnosticaron 88 EP, 28 (32%) en pacientes con COVID-19. Estos pacientes fueron con más frecuencia hombres y tenían más antecedentes de enfermedad tromboembólica previa. No hubo diferencias en la presentación clínica, características analíticas o radiológicas ni en los resultados finales entre ambos grupos. La mortalidad intrahospitalaria fue del 7% (2 casos) en pacientes COVID y del 17% (10 casos) en pacientes sin COVID (OR de muerte en pacientes COVID con EP: 0,38, IC 95%: 0,08-1,89). CONCLUSIONES: No se han observado diferencias clínicamente relevantes en las características clínicas, analíticas, radiológicas y los resultados finales de salud en una cohorte de pacientes con EP y COVID-19 respecto a los pacientes con EP sin esta enfermedad atendidos en los SUH OBJECTIVE: To analyze clinical, laboratory, and radiologic findings and final health outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To compare them to findings and outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism without COVID-19. METHODS: Multicenter, observational, retrospective study in 4 Spanish hospital emergency departments (EDs) from January 15 to April 15, 2020. Cases were located by reviewing all ED requests for pulmonary computed tomography angiography (CTA) procedures. Clinical, laboratory, and radiologic findings;medical histories and comorbidity;risk factors;and outcomes were compared between the 2 groups of patients (with or without COVID-19). RESULTS: A total of 399 CTAs were ordered;88 pulmonary embolisms were diagnosed, 28 of them (32%) in patients with COVID-19. This group had more men, and a history of thromboembolic disease was more common. We found no between-group differences in clinical presentation, laboratory, or radiologic findings;nor were there differences in final outcomes. In-hospital mortality was 7% (2 cases) in patients with COVID-19 and 17% (10 cases) in patients without the virus (odds ratio for death in patients with pulmonary embolism and COVID-19, 0.38;95% CI, 0.08-1.89). CONCLUSIONS: We found no clinically important differences in the clinical, laboratory, or radiologic findings between patients with or without COVID-19 who were treated for pulmonary embolism in our hospital EDs. Final outcomes also did not differ

9.
Non-conventional in 0 | WHO COVID | ID: covidwho-679942

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To analyze clinical, laboratory, and radiologic findings and final health outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To compare them to findings and outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism without COVID-19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicenter, observational, retrospective study in 4 Spanish hospital emergency departments (EDs) from January 15 to April 15, 2020. Cases were located by reviewing all ED requests for pulmonary computed tomography angiography (CTA) procedures. Clinical, laboratory, and radiologic findings;medical histories and comorbidity;risk factors;and outcomes were compared between the 2 groups of patients (with or without COVID-19). RESULTS: A total of 399 CTAs were ordered;88 pulmonary embolisms were diagnosed, 28 of them (32%) in patients with COVID-19. This group had more men, and a history of thromboembolic disease was more common. We found no between-group differences in clinical presentation, laboratory, or radiologic findings;nor were there differences in final outcomes. In-hospital mortality was 7% (2 cases) in patients with COVID-19 and 17% (10 cases) in patients without the virus (odds ratio for death in patients with pulmonary embolism and COVID-19, 0.38;95% CI, 0.08-1.89). CONCLUSION: We found no clinically important differences in the clinical, laboratory, or radiologic findings between patients with or without COVID-19 who were treated for pulmonary embolism in our hospital EDs. Final outcomes also did not differ. OBJETIVO: Analizar las caracteristicas clinicas, analiticas, radiologicas y los resultados finales de salud en una cohorte de pacientes con embolia pulmonar (EP) y COVID-19, y compararlas con un grupo de pacientes con EP sin COVID-19. METODO: Estudio multicentrico, observacional y retrospectivo realizado en cuatro servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) espanoles del 15 de enero al 15 de abril de 2020. La deteccion de EP se hizo mediante la revision de todas las angiografias por tomografia computarizada (angioTC) pulmonares solicitadas desde los SUH. Se han analizado dos grupos de pacientes con EP, con o sin enfermedad por COVID-19, y se comparan las caracteristicas clinicas, analiticas, radiologicas, antecedentes y comorbilidad, factores de riesgo y resultados finales. RESULTADOS: Se realizaron 399 angioTC y se diagnosticaron 88 EP, 28 (32%) en pacientes con COVID-19. Estos pacientes fueron con mas frecuencia hombres y tenian mas antecedentes de enfermedad tromboembolica previa. No hubo diferencias en la presentacion clinica, caracteristicas analiticas o radiologicas ni en los resultados finales entre ambos grupos. La mortalidad intrahospitalaria fue del 7% (2 casos) en pacientes COVID y del 17% (10 casos) en pacientes sin COVID (OR de muerte en pacientes COVID con EP: 0,38, IC 95%: 0,08-1,89). CONCLUSIONES: No se han observado diferencias clinicamente relevantes en las caracteristicas clinicas, analiticas, radiologicas y los resultados finales de salud en una cohorte de pacientes con EP y COVID-19 respecto a los pacientes con EP sin esta enfermedad atendidos en los SUH.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL