Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Ann Transl Med ; 10(10): 545, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1887397


Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has forced accelerated optimization of Emergency Department (ED) process, and simulation tools offer an alternative approach to strategic assessment and selection. Methods: Field research and case analysis methods were used to obtain the treatment process and medical records information from the ED of a general hospital. Minitab was used for analysis of the measurement system, and Arena was applied for simulation modelling. We established a framework for the triage protocol of ordinary and quarantined patients, analysed bottlenecks in the treatment time of the hospital's ED, and proposed an optimised management strategy. Results: The computed tomography (CT) pre-scheduling strategy simulation results demonstrated that longer CT room preparation times for quarantined people before their arrival (Tp) resulted in reduced CT scan and waiting times for quarantined patients, but these times were longer for ordinary patients. The nucleic acid priority strategy simulation results demonstrated that when the average daily number of ordinary patients (λc) was relatively stable, the hospital could guide ordinary patients to perform nucleic acid testing first followed by CT testing. However, when λc fluctuated greatly, the hospital could appropriately reduce the proportion of preferential nucleic acid testing. Furthermore, when λc was overloaded, the nucleic acid priority strategy showed no advantages. The joint analysis results demonstrated that the optimal strategy selection was significantly affected by the severity of the epidemic. The nucleic acid detection sample size optimisation strategy demonstrated that optimizing the sample size of each batch according to the number of patients could effectively reduce the waiting times for nucleic acid testing (Tn). Conclusions: Simulation tools are an alternative method for strategic evaluation and selection that do not require external factors.

BMJ ; 369: m1849, 2020 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495142


OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 16 government designated covid-19 treatment centres in China, 11 to 29 February 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 150 patients admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed covid-19 were included in the intention to treat analysis (75 patients assigned to hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care, 75 to standard of care alone). INTERVENTIONS: Hydroxychloroquine administrated at a loading dose of 1200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintenance dose of 800 mg daily (total treatment duration: two or three weeks for patients with mild to moderate or severe disease, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Negative conversion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by 28 days, analysed according to the intention to treat principle. Adverse events were analysed in the safety population in which hydroxychloroquine recipients were participants who received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine non-recipients were those managed with standard of care alone. RESULTS: Of 150 patients, 148 had mild to moderate disease and two had severe disease. The mean duration from symptom onset to randomisation was 16.6 (SD 10.5; range 3-41) days. A total of 109 (73%) patients (56 standard of care; 53 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) had negative conversion well before 28 days, and the remaining 41 (27%) patients (19 standard of care; 22 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) were censored as they did not reach negative conversion of virus. The probability of negative conversion by 28 days in the standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine group was 85.4% (95% confidence interval 73.8% to 93.8%), similar to that in the standard of care group (81.3%, 71.2% to 89.6%). The difference between groups was 4.1% (95% confidence interval -10.3% to 18.5%). In the safety population, adverse events were recorded in 7/80 (9%) hydroxychloroquine non-recipients and in 21/70 (30%) hydroxychloroquine recipients. The most common adverse event in the hydroxychloroquine recipients was diarrhoea, reported in 7/70 (10%) patients. Two hydroxychloroquine recipients reported serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of hydroxychloroquine did not result in a significantly higher probability of negative conversion than standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with mainly persistent mild to moderate covid-19. Adverse events were higher in hydroxychloroquine recipients than in non-recipients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2000029868.

Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , COVID-19 , China , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Treatment Outcome