Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
J Laryngol Otol ; 135(8): 675-679, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232054

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute epistaxis can be a life-threatening airway emergency, requiring in-patient admission. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic placed significant strain on hospital resources, and management has shifted towards an out-patient-centred approach. METHODS: A five-month single-centre retrospective study was undertaken of all epistaxis patients managed by the ENT department. A pre-coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic group was managed with pre-existing guidelines, compared to new guidelines for the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic group. A telephone survey was performed on out-patients with non-dissolvable packs to assess patient comfort and satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were seen. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic group had significantly more patients aged over 65 years (p = 0.004), an increased use of absorbable dressings and local haemostatic agents (Nasopore and Surgiflo), and fewer admissions (all p < 0.0005). Rates of re-presentation and morbidity, and length of hospital stay were similar. The telephone survey revealed out-patient management to be efficacious and feasible. CONCLUSION: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has shifted epistaxis management towards local haemostatic agents and out-patient management; this approach is as safe and effective as previously well-established regimens.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Epistaxis/therapy , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Forecasting , Hemostatic Techniques , Hospital Departments , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Otolaryngology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Retrospective Studies , United Kingdom/epidemiology
2.
J Surg Res ; 264: 469-473, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1174400

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Stop the Bleed (STB) campaign was developed in part to educate the lay public about hemorrhage control techniques aimed at reducing preventable trauma deaths. Studies have shown this training increases bystanders' confidence and willingness to provide aid. One high-risk group might be better solicited to take the course: individuals who have been a victim of previous trauma, as high rates of recidivism after trauma are well-established. Given this group's risk for recurrent injury, we evaluated their attitudes toward STB concepts. METHODS: We surveyed trauma patients admitted to 3 urban trauma centers in Baltimore from January 8, 2020 to March 14, 2020. The survey was terminated prematurely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Trauma patients hospitalized on any inpatient unit were invited to complete the survey via an electronic tablet. The survey asked about demographics, prior exposure to life-threatening hemorrhage and first aid training, and willingness to help a person with major bleeding. The Johns Hopkins IRB approved waiver of consent for this study. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients completed the survey. The majority of respondents had been hospitalized before (92.9%) and had witnessed severe bleeding (60.7%). The majority had never taken a first aid course (60.7%) nor heard of STB (83.9%). Most respondents would be willing to help someone with severe bleeding form a car crash (98.2%) or gunshot wound (94.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients admitted for trauma had not heard about Stop the Bleed, but stated willingness to respond to someone injured with major bleeding. Focusing STB education on individuals at high-risk for trauma recidivism may be particularly effective in spreading the message and skills of STB.


Subject(s)
First Aid/methods , Health Education/methods , Hemorrhage/therapy , Hemostatic Techniques , Wounds and Injuries/therapy , Accidents, Traffic , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Baltimore , Cohort Studies , Female , Firearms , Health Education/statistics & numerical data , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Hemorrhage/etiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Severity of Illness Index , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Wounds and Injuries/complications , Wounds and Injuries/diagnosis , Young Adult
4.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 115(10): 1609-1616, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-717821

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Although current literature has addressed gastrointestinal presentations including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abnormal liver chemistries, and hyperlipasemia as possible coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifestations, the risk and type of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in this population is not well characterized. METHODS: This is a matched case-control (1:2) study with 41 cases of GIB (31 upper and 10 lower) in patients with COVID-19 and 82 matched controls of patients with COVID-19 without GIB. The primary objective was to characterize bleeding etiologies, and our secondary aim was to discuss outcomes and therapeutic approaches. RESULTS: There was no difference in the presenting symptoms of the cases and controls, and no difference in severity of COVID-19 manifestations (P > 0.05) was observed. Ten (32%) patients with upper GIB underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and 5 (50%) patients with lower GIBs underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. The most common upper and lower GIB etiologies were gastric or duodenal ulcers (80%) and rectal ulcers related to rectal tubes (60%), respectively. Four of the esophagogastroduodenoscopies resulted in therapeutic interventions, and the 3 patients with rectal ulcers were referred to colorectal surgery for rectal packing. Successful hemostasis was achieved in all 7 cases that required interventions. Transfusion requirements between patients who underwent endoscopic therapy and those who were conservatively managed were not significantly different. Anticoagulation and rectal tube usage trended toward being a risk factor for GIB, although it did not reach statistical significance. DISCUSSION: In COVID-19 patients with GIB, compared with matched controls of COVID-19 patients without GIB, there seemed to be no difference in initial presenting symptoms. Of those with upper and lower GIB, the most common etiology was peptic ulcer disease and rectal ulcers from rectal tubes, respectively. Conservative management seems to be a reasonable initial approach in managing these complex cases, but larger studies are needed to guide management.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Peptic Ulcer/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Rectal Diseases/epidemiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Blood Transfusion/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Endoscopy/statistics & numerical data , Enema/adverse effects , Enema/instrumentation , Female , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Hemostatic Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Peptic Ulcer/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Rectal Diseases/etiology , Rectal Diseases/therapy , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL