Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg ; 93(1): 118-123, 2022 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1901320

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although the need for high-level care persists postdischarge, severely injured trauma survivors have historically poor adherence to follow-up. We hypothesized that a dedicated Center for Trauma Survivorship (CTS) improves follow-up and facilitates postdischarge specialty care. METHODS: A retrospective study of "CTS eligible" trauma patients before (January to December 2017) and after (January to December 2019) creation of the CTS was performed. Patients with an intensive care unit stay ≥2 days or a New Injury Severity Score of ≥16 are CTS eligible. The before (PRE) cohort was followed through December 2018 and the after (CTS) cohort through December 2020. Primary outcome was follow-up within the hospital system exclusive of mental health and rehabilitative therapy appointments. Secondary outcomes include postdischarge surgical procedures and specialty-specific follow-up. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographics or hospital duration in the PRE (n = 177) and CTS (n = 119) cohorts. Of the CTS group, 91% presented for outpatient follow-up within the hospital system, compared with 73% in the PRE group (p < 0.001). In the PRE cohort, only 39% were seen by the trauma service compared with 62% in the CTS cohort (p < 0.001). Center for Trauma Survivorship patients also had increased follow-up with other providers (80% vs. 65%; p = 0.006). Notably, 33% of CTS patients had additional surgery compared with only 20% in the PRE group (p = 0.011). Center for Trauma Survivorship patients had more than 20% more outpatient visits (1,280 vs. 1,006 visits). CONCLUSION: Despite the follow-up period for the CTS cohort occurring during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, limiting availability of outpatient services, our CTS significantly improved follow-up with trauma providers, as well as with other specialties. The CTS patients also underwent significantly more secondary operations. These data demonstrate that creation of a CTS can improve the postdischarge care of severely injured trauma survivors, allowing for care coordination within the health care system, retaining patients, generating revenue, and providing needed follow-up care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Wounds and Injuries , Aftercare , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Injury Severity Score , Pandemics , Patient Discharge , Retrospective Studies , Survivorship , Trauma Centers , Wounds and Injuries/therapy
2.
J Surg Res ; 266: 361-365, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275539

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy improves outcomes for critically ill patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Data are limited on the use and benefit of tracheostomies for intubated, critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. During the surge in COVID 19 infections in metropolitan New York/New Jersey, our hospital cared for many COVID-19 patients who required prolonged intubation. This study describes the outcomes in COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy. METHODS: We present a case series of patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy at a single institution. Tracheostomies were performed on patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation beyond 3 wk. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and ventilator settings prior to tracheostomy were reviewed. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included time on mechanical ventilation, length of ICU and hospital stay, and discharge disposition. RESULTS: Fifteen COVID-19 patients underwent tracheostomy at an average of 31 d post intubation. Two patients (13%) died. Half of our cohort was liberated from the ventilator (8 patients, 53%), with an average time to liberation of 14 ± 6 d after tracheostomy. Among patients off mechanical ventilation, 5 (63%) had their tracheostomies removed prior to discharge. The average intensive care length of stay was 47 ± 13 d (range 29-74 d) and the average hospital stay was 59 ± 16 d (range 34-103 d). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports promising outcomes in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure and need for prolonged ventilation who undergo tracheostomy during their hospitalization. Further research is warranted to establish appropriate indications for tracheostomy in COVID-19 and confirm outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Critical Illness , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Ventilator Weaning/statistics & numerical data
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL