ABSTRACT
Nationwide data of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on heart failure (HF) hospitalizations is lacking. We conducted this study to elucidate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HF hospitalizations. Additionally, we assessed the differences in hospitalization characteristics during the pandemic and the impact that a concurrent diagnosis of COVID-19 has on various outcomes and predictors of inpatient mortality among patients admitted for HF. The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was queried for all hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of HF between 2017 and 2020. Monthly HF hospitalizations were trended longitudinally over this period. Beginning April 1, 2020, concurrent COVID-19 infections were identified. Subsequently, we stratified HF hospitalizations between April 2020 and December 2020 (HF-2020) based on if concomitant COVID-19 was diagnosed, forming the HF-COVID+ve and HF-COVID-ve groups respectively. HF-2020 was also compared with prepandemic HF hospitalizations between April 2019 and December 2019 (HF-2019). Baseline characteristics were compared, and adjusted outcomes were obtained. During the initial COVID-19 surge in April 2020, HF admissions were reduced by 47% compared to January 2020. Following this decline, HF hospitalizations increased but did not reach prepandemic levels. HF-2020 admissions had an increased complication burden compared to HF-2019, including acute myocardial infarction (8.9% vs 6.6%, P < 0.005) and pulmonary embolism (4.1% vs 3.4%, P < 0.005) indicating a sicker cohort of patients. HF-COVID+ve hospitalizations had 2.9 times higher odds of inpatient mortality compared to HF-COVID-ve and an increased adjusted length of stay by 2.16 days (P < 0.005). A pandemic of the same magnitude as COVID-19 can overwhelm even the most advanced health systems. Early resource mobilization and preparedness is essential to provide care to a sick cohort of patients like acute HF, who are directly and indirectly effected by the consequences of the pandemic which has worsened hospitalization outcomes.
ABSTRACT
Background The study aims to assess the effect of personal protective equipment (PPE) on the physical and psychological well-being of health care workers (HCWs) and its impact on patient safety. Methods After ethical approval, a 14-point questionnaire was circulated offline and online among the HCWs of ours institute, who were involved in performing invasive procedures while wearing a PPE. The responses were analysed using the SPSS software version 26. Results Of 198 responses, the mean duration of PPE use was 4.6 ± 1.52 h. Seventy percent of respondents suggested <4 h of continuous use of PPE. Seventy-seven percent found difficulties during the procedures while wearing PPE and agreed to errors while performing a procedure. Poor visibility (95.5%), fogging (84.9%), communication difficulty (75.3%), sweating (74.2%), posture-related discomfort (56.1%) and poor concentration (51%) were major causes. Anxiety (39.9%) and fear of spreading an infection to the family (42.9%) were major psychological effects. Eighty percent of HCWs raised concern over the quality of PPE, N95 mask and eye protector. The HCWs felt the need to improve the quality of PPEs, use extra padding around the ears, sealing the N95 mask with adhesive tape, besides using sign language for communication for more safety. Fifty percent graded the procedure-related difficulty level >6 on a Likert scale of 1–10. Conclusion PPE-related discomfort is common among the HCWs and could contribute to errors during an invasive procedure. Efforts to alleviate the physical and psychological well-being of the HCWs will be essential for reducing procedural error while wearing a PPE.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hospitalization of patients infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have remained considerable worldwide. Patients often develop severe complications and have high mortality rates. The cycle threshold (Ct) value derived from nasopharyngeal swab samples using real time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) may be a useful prognostic marker in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, however, its role in predicting the course of the pandemic has not been evaluated thus far. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study which included all patients who had a nasopharyngeal sample positive for SARS-CoV-2 between April 4 -June 5, 2020. The Ct value was used to estimate the number of viral particles in a patient sample. The trend in initial viral load on admission on a population level was evaluated. Moreover, patient characteristics and outcomes stratified by viral load categories were compared and initial viral load was assessed as an independent predictor of intubation and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 461 hospitalized patients met the inclusion criteria. This study consisted predominantly of acutely infected patients with a median of 4 days since symptom onset to PCR. As the severity of the pandemic eased, there was an increase in the percentage of samples in the low initial viral load category, coinciding with a decrease in deaths. Compared to an initial low viral load, a high initial viral load was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR 5.5, CI 3.1-9.7, p < 0.001) and intubation (OR 1.82 CI 1.07-3.11, p = 0.03), while an initial intermediate viral load was associated with increased risk of inpatient mortality (OR 1.9, CI 1.14-3.21, p = 0.015) but not with increased risk for intubation. CONCLUSION: The Ct value obtained from nasopharyngeal samples of hospitalized patients on admission may serve as a prognostic marker at an individual level and may help predict the course of the pandemic when evaluated at a population level.