Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Front Psychiatry ; 14: 1129268, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2279832

ABSTRACT

Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) nurses are highly prone to occupational stress and burnout, affecting their physical and mental health. The occurrence of the pandemic and related events increased nurses' workload and further exacerbated their stress and burnout. This work investigates occupational stress and burnout experienced by ICU nurses working with COVID and non-COVID patients. Method: A prospective longitudinal mixed-methods study was conducted with a cohort of ICU nurses working in medical ICU (COVID unit; n = 14) and cardiovascular ICU (non-COVID unit; n = 5). Each participant was followed for six 12-h shifts. Data on occupational stress and burnout prevalence were collected using validated questionnaires. Physiological indices of stress were collected using wrist-worn wearable technologies. Participants elaborated on the causes of stress experienced each shift by completing open-ended questions. Data were analyzed using statistical and qualitative methods. Results: Participants caring for COVID patients at the COVID unit were 3.71 times more likely to experience stress (p < 0.001) in comparison to non-COVID unit participants. No differences in stress levels were found when the same participants worked with COVID and non-COVID patients at different shifts (p = 0.58) at the COVID unit. The cohorts expressed similar contributors to stress, based in communication tasks, patient acuity, clinical procedures, admission processes, proning, labs, and assisting coworkers. Conclusion: Nurses in COVID units, irrespective of whether they care for a COVID patient, experience occupational stress and burnout.

2.
PLoS One ; 17(12): e0278781, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2197055

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are predicted to have worse COVID-19 outcomes due to their compromised immunity. However, this association remains uncertain because published studies have had small sample sizes and variability in chronic comorbidity adjustment. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study conducted at a multihospital health system, we compared COVID-19 outcomes and survival up to 60 days following hospital admission in SOT recipients taking baseline immunosuppressants versus hospitalized control patients. RESULTS: The study included 4,562 patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19 (108 SOT recipients and 4,454 controls) from 03/2020 to 08/2020. Mortality at 60 days was higher for SOT recipients (17% SOT vs 10% control; unadjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-2.91, P = 0.04). We then conducted a 1:5 propensity matched cohort analysis (100 SOT recipients; 500 controls) using age, sex, race, body mass index, hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, liver disease, admission month, and area deprivation index. Within 28 days of admission, SOT recipients had fewer hospital-free days (median; 17 SOT vs 21 control; OR = 0.64, 95%CI 0.46-0.90, P = 0.01) but had similar ICU-free days (OR = 1.20, 95%CI 0.72-2.00, P = 0.49) and ventilator-free days (OR = 0.91, 95%CI 0.53-1.57, P = 0.75). There was no statistically significant difference in 28-day mortality (9% SOT vs 12% control; OR = 0.76, 95%CI 0.36-1.57, P = 0.46) or 60-day mortality (16% SOT vs 14% control; OR = 1.15, 95%CI 0.64-2.08, P = 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized SOT recipients appear to need additional days of hospital care but can achieve short-term mortality outcomes from COVID-19 that are similar to non-SOT recipients in a propensity matched cohort study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Organ Transplantation , Humans , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Hospitalization , Transplant Recipients
3.
J Clin Med ; 10(12)2021 Jun 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526844

ABSTRACT

Carboxyhemoglobinemia is a common but a serious disorder, defined as an increase in carboxyhemoglobin level. Unfortunately, there are few data on carboxyhemoglobinemia in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Therefore, our study aimed to evaluate the incidence and etiologies of carboxyhemoglobinemia in COVID-19 patients and determine any association between carboxyhemoglobinemia and novel coronavirus infection. A retrospective chart review was performed at an academic medical center for all inpatient COVID-19 cases with either single or serial carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) levels from March 2020 through August 2020.Our study demonstrates that carboxyhemoglobinemia in COVID-19 patients is due to sepsis, hemolysis, and cytokine storm, triggered by the novel coronavirus infection sequela and is not directly from the virulence of novel coronavirus. Given the coexisting illnesses in critically ill COVID-19 patients, it is impossible to establish if coronavirus virulence was the culprit of elevated COHb levels. Moreover, our study found a high incidence of carboxyhemoglobinemia in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry can be inaccurate and unreliable; however, our study could not demonstrate any uniform results on the discrepancy between oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry and arterial blood gas. In this study, COHb levels were measured using a CO-oximeter. Therefore, we recommend monitoring the COHb level routinely in critically ill COVID-19 patients to allow more effective and prompt treatment.

4.
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) ; 34(3): 345-348, 2021 Jan 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1061406

ABSTRACT

With alternatives such as gene profiling available for surveillance after orthotopic heart transplantation, we sought to evaluate the utilization of endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs) for hospitalized patients after heart transplantation. Surveillance EMBs in patients with and without complications were evaluated from the 2004 to 2014 National Inpatient Sample. Over the study period, there was no significant change in the number of EMB procedures performed (P = 0.44). Of 37,955 EMBs, 2283 (6%) were in the setting of graft complications, while 35,672 EMBs were not related to graft complications. EMBs in graft complications did not show a significant increase in length of stay over time (P = 0.06), but had a significant increase in cost over time (P = 0.001). However, those with graft complications had an average of a 5-day longer length of stay (P < 0.001) and costs that were $88,816 (P < 0.001) more expensive compared with those without graft complications. In conclusion, the vast majority of in-hospital EMBs were not related to heart transplantation complications. Nevertheless, EMB hospitalizations with graft complications showed significantly greater length of stay and cost. With the COVID-19 pandemic, it seems more effective to use minimal-contact health surveillance methods rather than invasive EMBs.

5.
J Diabetes Sci Technol ; 14(6): 1065-1073, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-873877

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Amidst the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has emerged as an alternative for inpatient point-of-care blood glucose (POC-BG) monitoring. We performed a feasibility pilot study using CGM in critically ill patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: Single-center, retrospective study of glucose monitoring in critically ill patients with COVID-19 on insulin therapy using Medtronic Guardian Connect and Dexcom G6 CGM systems. Primary outcomes were feasibility and accuracy for trending POC-BG. Secondary outcomes included reliability and nurse acceptance. Sensor glucose (SG) was used for trends between POC-BG with nursing guidance to reduce POC-BG frequency from one to two hours to four hours when the SG was in the target range. Mean absolute relative difference (MARD), Clarke error grids analysis (EGA), and Bland-Altman (B&A) plots were calculated for accuracy of paired SG and POC-BG measurements. RESULTS: CGM devices were placed on 11 patients: Medtronic (n = 6) and Dexcom G6 (n = 5). Both systems were feasible and reliable with good nurse acceptance. To determine accuracy, 437 paired SG and POC-BG readings were analyzed. For Medtronic, the MARD was 13.1% with 100% of readings in zones A and B on Clarke EGA. For Dexcom, MARD was 11.1% with 98% of readings in zones A and B. B&A plots had a mean bias of -17.76 mg/dL (Medtronic) and -1.94 mg/dL (Dexcom), with wide 95% limits of agreement. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, CGM is feasible in critically ill patients and has acceptable accuracy to identify trends and guide intermittent blood glucose monitoring with insulin therapy.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/analysis , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Critical Illness/therapy , Monitoring, Physiologic/instrumentation , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus/physiology , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/instrumentation , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/mortality , Diabetes Mellitus/blood , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/mortality , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Hyperglycemia/blood , Hyperglycemia/diagnosis , Hyperglycemia/mortality , Hyperglycemia/therapy , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin Infusion Systems , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Monitoring, Physiologic/methods , Pandemics , Pilot Projects , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Point-of-Care Systems , Prognosis , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL