Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
J Community Health ; 2022 Nov 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2119371


The full impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic are yet to be determined. While highly effective vaccines are available to prevent and decrease the severity of COVID-19 infection, significant COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy remains. Understanding motivations, discouraging factors, opinions, and information sources regarding COVID-19 is essential to targeting vaccine hesitancy and improving vaccine uptake. A 25 question survey was administered to the patients of a free clinic in the Midwest to assess patient demographic data, opinions about and experience with COVID-19, the COVID-19 vaccines, and information sources. The main outcome of interest was if vaccination status influenced information sources and opinions regarding COVID-19. This study also analyzed motivating and discouraging factors for vaccination. The study had a total of 104 participants with 7 being excluded. There were a total of 97 survey responses included in this study, there were 79 vaccinated patients and 18 unvaccinated patients. This survey study found differences in information sources between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. Opinions surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine, public health agencies, and perceived severity of COVID-19 also varied between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. The differential information sources and opinions between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups emphasizes the importance of access to high-quality sources and educating the community to improve public health.

Respir Care ; 2022 Jun 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2055777


BACKGROUND: The evolution of compliance and driving pressure in ARDS and the effects of time spent on noninvasive respiratory support prior to intubation have not been well studied. We conducted this study to assess the effect of the duration of noninvasive respiratory support prior to intubation (ie, noninvasive ventilation [NIV], high-flow nasal cannula [HFNC], or a combination of NIV and HFNC) on static compliance and driving pressure and retrospectively describe its trajectory over time for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS while on mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from one university-affiliated academic medical center, one rural magnet hospital, and 3 suburban community facilities. A total of 589 subjects were included: 55 COVID-19 positive, 137 culture positive, and 397 culture-negative subjects. Static compliance and driving pressure were calculated at each 8-h subject-ventilator assessment. RESULTS: Days of pre-intubation noninvasive respiratory support were associated with worse compliance and driving pressure but did not moderate any trajectory. COVID-19-positive subjects showed non-statistically significant worsening compliance by 0.08 units per subject-ventilator assessment (P = .24), whereas COVID-19-negative subjects who were either culture positive or negative showed statistically significant improvement (0.12 and 0.18, respectively; both P < .05); a statistically similar but inverse pattern was observed for driving pressure. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to non-COVID-19 ARDS, COVID-19 ARDS was associated with a more ominous trajectory with no improvement in static compliance or driving pressures. Though there was no association between days of pre-intubation noninvasive respiratory support and mortality, its use was associated with worse overall compliance and driving pressure.

Med Sci Educ ; 31(2): 589-598, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1084425


PURPOSE: Responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, American medical schools made swift changes to clinical education based on guidelines provided by the Association of American Medical Colleges. The purpose of this study was to collect medical student perceptions of the solely online learning environment, their quality of life (QoL), and the pandemic response by their School of Medicine (SoM) to provide suggestions to inform medical schools' responses during the continuation of this pandemic and the next. METHODS: Between April 29, 2020 and May 16, 2020, the authors distributed a 60-item questionnaire that assessed demographics, learning environment, QoL, and the SoM response. Likert-type items were analyzed on an item-by-item basis, whereas themes were identified for open-ended questions. RESULTS: A total of 330 medical students (of 632; 52.2%) responded. Those who responded had positive perceptions of the online learning environment with moderate QoL disruptions to concentration and sleep. Although most students perceived being able to contribute meaningfully to the healthcare setting, they viewed themselves as underutilized. Three themes encapsulated both positive and negative perceptions of the SoM's response-communication, learning environment, and empathy and support. CONCLUSION: These findings provide insight into medical student perceptions of their learning environment and QoL as they acclimated to changes resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Results can help inform a SoM's response during the continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as during future pandemics or crises. Follow-up surveys of medical students at multiple institutions across the USA and abroad will be essential to better characterize student perceptions.

Crit Care Explor ; 2(10): e0229, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-873084


Given perceived similarities between coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia and the acute respiratory distress syndrome, we explored whether awake self-proning improved outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019-infected patients treated in a rural medical center with limited resources during a significant local coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data. SETTING: Single-center rural community-based medical center in Grand Island, NE. PATIENTS: One hundred five nonintubated, coronavirus disease-infected patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After patients were educated on the benefits of awake self-proning, compliance was voluntary. The primary outcome was need for intubation during the hospital stay; secondary outcomes included serial peripheral capillary oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry to the Fio2 ratios, in-hospital mortality, and discharge disposition. Of 105 nonintubated, coronavirus disease-infected patients, 40 tolerated awake self-proning. Patients who were able to prone were younger and had lower disease severity. The risk of intubation was lower in proned patients after adjusting for disease severity using Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.09-0.96; p = 0.043) or Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.10-0.91; p = 0.034). No prone patient died compared with 24.6% of patients who were not prone (p < 0.001; number needed to treat = 5; 95% CI, 3-8). The probability of being discharged alive and peripheral capillary oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry to the Fio2 ratios were statistically similar for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Awake self-proning was associated with lower mortality and intubation rates in coronavirus disease 2019-infected patients. Prone positioning appears to be a safe and inexpensive strategy to improve outcomes and spare limited resources. Prospective efforts are needed to better delineate the effect of awake proning on oxygenation and to improve patients' ability to tolerate this intervention.