Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 37
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263078, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1883624

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 posed the healthcare professionals at enormous risk during this pandemic era while vaccination was recommended as one of the effective preventive approaches. It was visualized that almost all health workforces would be under vaccination on a priority basis as they are the frontline fighters during this pandemic. This study was designed to explore the reality regarding infection and vaccination status of COVID-19 among healthcare professionals of Bangladesh. It was a web-based cross-sectional survey and conducted among 300 healthcare professionals available in the academic platform of Bangladesh. A multivariate logistic regression model was used for the analytical exploration. Adjusted and Unadjusted Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for the specified setting indicators. A Chi-square test was used to observe the association. Ethical issues were maintained according to the guidance of the declaration of Helsinki. Study revealed that 41% of all respondents identified as COVID-19 positive whereas a significant number (18.3%) found as non-vaccinated due to registration issues as 52.70%, misconception regarding vaccination as 29.10%, and health-related issues as 18.20%. Respondents of more than 50 years of age found more significant on having positive infection rather than the younger age groups. Predictors for the non-vaccination guided that male respondents (COR/p = 3.49/0.01), allied health professionals, and respondents from the public organizations (p = 0.01) who were ≤29 (AOR/p = 4.45/0.01) years of age significantly identified as non-vaccinated. As the older female groups were found more infected and a significant number of health care professionals found as non-vaccinated, implementation of specific strategies and policies are needed to ensure the safety precautions and vaccination among such COVID-19 frontiers.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Bangladesh/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient/prevention & control , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/psychology , /statistics & numerical data
2.
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) ; 68(2): 206-211, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1725082

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: A multicentric, cross-sectional study was carried out to determine the prevalence and risk factors for Coronavirus disease 2019 in medical students and residents from four universities and affiliated hospitals in Brazil. METHODS: A survey about contamination risk and symptoms was sent to all participants through email and WhatsApp. Prevalence was measured by the self-report of positive polymerase chain reaction or serological test. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed, and odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were calculated. RESULTS: Prevalence of infection by Sars-CoV-2 was 14.9% (151/1011). The disease was more prevalent in residents and interns than in undergraduate students. Contact with an infected relative outside the hospital or with colleagues without using personal protective equipment was associated with higher contamination. Contact with patients without wearing goggles and higher weekly frequency of contact were the two factors independently associated with the infection by Coronavirus disease 2019 in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students, interns, and residents have a higher prevalence of Coronavirus disease 2019 than the general population, in which the last two groups are significantly at higher risk. Contacting patients at a higher weekly frequency increases the risk for infection. The use of goggles should be reinforced when contacting patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Internship and Residency , Students, Medical , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/etiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Internship and Residency/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment , Prevalence , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools, Medical/statistics & numerical data , Students, Medical/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
Viruses ; 14(2)2022 01 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1625696

ABSTRACT

Identification of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by RT-PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab sample is a common test for diagnosing COVID-19. However, some patients present clinical, laboratorial, and radiological evidence of COVID-19 infection with negative RT-PCR result(s). Thus, we assessed whether positive results were associated with intubation and mortality. This study was conducted in a Brazilian tertiary hospital from March to August of 2020. All patients had clinical, laboratory, and radiological diagnosis of COVID-19. They were divided into two groups: positive (+) RT-PCR group, with 2292 participants, and negative (-) RT-PCR group, with 706 participants. Patients with negative RT-PCR testing and an alternative most probable diagnosis were excluded from the study. The RT-PCR(+) group presented increased risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and 28-day mortality, when compared to the RT-PCR(-) group. A positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR result was independently associated with intubation and 28 day in-hospital mortality. Accordingly, we concluded that patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis based on clinical data, despite a negative RT-PCR test from nasopharyngeal samples, presented more favorable outcomes than patients with positive RT-PCR test(s).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Brazil , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
4.
Am J Surg ; 223(1): 176-181, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1568479

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Perioperative inefficiency can increase cost. We describe a process improvement initiative that addressed preoperative delays on an academic vascular surgery service. METHODS: First case vascular surgeries from July 2019-January 2020 were retrospectively reviewed for delays, defined as late arrival to the operating room (OR). A stakeholder group spearheaded by a surgeon-informaticist analyzed this process and implemented a novel electronic medical records (EMR) preoperative tool with improved preoperative workflow and role delegation; results were reviewed for 3 months after implementation. RESULTS: 57% of cases had first case on-time starts with average delay of 19 min. Inappropriate preoperative orders were identified as a dominant delay source (average delay = 38 min). Three months post-implementation, 53% of first cases had on-time starts with average delay of 11 min (P < 0.05). No delays were due to missing orders. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent preoperative workflows led to inappropriate orders and delays, increasing cost and decreasing quality. A novel EMR tool subsequently reduced delays with projected savings of $1,200/case. Workflow standardization utilizing informatics can increase efficiency, raising the value of surgical care.


Subject(s)
Cost Savings/statistics & numerical data , Efficiency, Organizational/economics , Medical Informatics , Operating Rooms/organization & administration , Vascular Surgical Procedures/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/economics , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Efficiency, Organizational/standards , Efficiency, Organizational/statistics & numerical data , Health Plan Implementation/organization & administration , Health Plan Implementation/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Operating Rooms/economics , Operating Rooms/standards , Operating Rooms/statistics & numerical data , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Program Evaluation , Quality Improvement , Retrospective Studies , Root Cause Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Vascular Surgical Procedures/economics , Vascular Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Workflow
5.
Crit Care Med ; 49(10): 1739-1748, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1475872

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has overwhelmed healthcare resources even in wealthy nations, necessitating rationing of limited resources without previously established crisis standards of care protocols. In Massachusetts, triage guidelines were designed based on acute illness and chronic life-limiting conditions. In this study, we sought to retrospectively validate this protocol to cohorts of critically ill patients from our hospital. DESIGN: We applied our hospital-adopted guidelines, which defined severe and major chronic conditions as those associated with a greater than 50% likelihood of 1- and 5-year mortality, respectively, to a critically ill patient population. We investigated mortality for the same intervals. SETTING: An urban safety-net hospital ICU. PATIENTS: All adults hospitalized during April of 2015 and April 2019 identified through a clinical database search. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 365 admitted patients, 15.89% had one or more defined chronic life-limiting conditions. These patients had higher 1-year (46.55% vs 13.68%; p < 0.01) and 5-year (50.00% vs 17.22%; p < 0.01) mortality rates than those without underlying conditions. Irrespective of classification of disease severity, patients with metastatic cancer, congestive heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and neurodegenerative disease had greater than 50% 1-year mortality, whereas patients with chronic lung disease and cirrhosis had less than 50% 1-year mortality. Observed 1- and 5-year mortality for cirrhosis, heart failure, and metastatic cancer were more variable when subdivided into severe and major categories. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with major and severe chronic medical conditions overall had 46.55% and 50.00% mortality at 1 and 5 years, respectively. However, mortality varied between conditions. Our findings appear to support a crisis standards protocol which focuses on acute illness severity and only considers underlying conditions carrying a greater than 50% predicted likelihood of 1-year mortality. Modifications to the chronic lung disease, congestive heart failure, and cirrhosis criteria should be refined if they are to be included in future models.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Crisis Intervention/standards , Resource Allocation/methods , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Crisis Intervention/methods , Crisis Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Massachusetts , Middle Aged , Resource Allocation/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Safety-net Providers/organization & administration , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Standard of Care/standards , Standard of Care/statistics & numerical data , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data
6.
Am J Emerg Med ; 53: 285.e1-285.e5, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1432719

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 brought unique challenges; however, it remains unclear what effect the pandemic had on violence in healthcare. The objective of this study was to identify the impact of the pandemic on workplace violence at an academic emergency department (ED). METHODS: This mixed-methods study involved a prospective descriptive survey study and electronic medical record review. Within our hospital referral region (HRR), the first COVID-19 case was documented on 3/11/2020 and cases peaked in mid-November 2020. We compared the monthly HRR COVID-19 case rate per 100,000 people to the rate of violent incidents per 1000 ED visits. Multidisciplinary ED staff were surveyed both pre/early-pandemic (April 2020) and mid/late-pandemic (December 2020) regarding workplace violence experienced over the prior 6-months. The study was deemed exempt by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: There was a positive association between the monthly HRR COVID-19 case rate and rate of violent ED incidents (r = 0.24). Violent incidents increased overall during the pandemic (2.53 incidents per 1000 visits) compared to the 3 months prior (1.13 incidents per 1000 visits, p < .001), as well as compared to the previous year (1.24 incidents per 1000 patient visits, p < .001). Survey respondents indicated a higher incidence of assault during the pandemic, compared to before (p = .019). DISCUSSION: Incidents of workplace violence at our ED increased during the pandemic and there was a positive association of these incidents with the COVID-19 case rate. Our findings indicate health systems should prioritize employee safety during future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Workplace Violence/statistics & numerical data , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Chi-Square Distribution , Crime Victims/rehabilitation , Data Mining/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Workplace Violence/trends
7.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(8): e2120456, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1351178

ABSTRACT

Importance: Prior studies on COVID-19 and pregnancy have reported higher rates of cesarean delivery and preterm birth and increased morbidity and mortality. Additional data encompassing a longer time period are needed. Objective: To examine characteristics and outcomes of a large US cohort of women who underwent childbirth with vs without COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study compared characteristics and outcomes of women (age ≥18 years) who underwent childbirth with vs without COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and February 28, 2021, at 499 US academic medical centers or community affiliates. Follow-up was limited to in-hospital course and discharge destination. Childbirth was defined by clinical classification software procedural codes of 134-137. A diagnosis of COVID-19 was identified using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis of U07.1. Data were analyzed from April 1 to April 30, 2021. Exposures: The presence of a COVID-19 diagnosis using ICD-10. Main Outcomes and Measures: Analyses compared demographic characteristics, gestational age, and comorbidities. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and discharge status. Continuous variables were analyzed using t test, and categorical variables were analyzed using χ2. Results: Among 869 079 women, 18 715 (2.2%) had COVID-19, and 850 364 (97.8%) did not. Most women were aged 18 to 30 years (11 550 women with COVID-19 [61.7%]; 447 534 women without COVID-19 [52.6%]) and were White (8060 White women [43.1%] in the COVID-19 cohort; 499 501 White women (58.7%) in the non-COVID-19 cohort). There was no significant increase in cesarean delivery among women with COVID-19 (6088 women [32.5%] vs 273 810 women [32.3%]; P = .57). Women with COVID-19 were more likely to have preterm birth (3072 women [16.4%] vs 97 967 women [11.5%]; P < .001). Women giving birth with COVID-19, compared with women without COVID-19, had significantly higher rates of ICU admission (977 women [5.2%] vs 7943 women [0.9%]; odds ratio [OR], 5.84 [95% CI, 5.46-6.25]; P < .001), respiratory intubation and mechanical ventilation (275 women [1.5%] vs 884 women [0.1%]; OR, 14.33 [95% CI, 12.50-16.42]; P < .001), and in-hospital mortality (24 women [0.1%] vs 71 [<0.01%]; OR, 15.38 [95% CI, 9.68-24.43]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This retrospective cohort study found that women with COVID-19 giving birth had higher rates of mortality, intubation, ICU admission, and preterm birth than women without COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Case-Control Studies , Cesarean Section/statistics & numerical data , Databases, Factual , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/mortality , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
8.
PLoS One ; 16(7): e0254994, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1319523

ABSTRACT

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has been unclear how vulnerable people with HIV (PwH) are to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We sought to determine if PwH are more likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 than people without HIV, and to identify risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 positivity among PwH. We conducted a cross-sectional study in which we collected electronic medical record data for all patients who underwent SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing at an academic medical center. Presence of HIV and other chronic diseases were based on the presence of ICD-10 diagnosis codes. We calculated the percent positivity for SARS-CoV-2 among PwH and among people without HIV. Among PwH, we compared demographic factors, comorbidities, HIV viral load, CD4 T-cell count, and antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens between those who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and those who tested negative. Comparisons were made using chi squared tests or Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Multivariate models were created using logistic regression. Among 69,763 people tested for SARS-CoV-2, 0.6% (431) were PwH. PwH were not significantly more likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 than people without HIV (7.2% (31/431) vs 8.4% (5820/69763), p = 0.35), but were more likely to be younger, Black, and male (p-values < .0001). There were no significant differences in HIV clinical factors, chronic diseases, or ART regimens among PwH testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 versus those testing negative. In our sample, PwH were not more likely to contract SARS-CoV-2, despite being more likely to be members of demographic groups known to be at higher risk for infection. Differences between PwH who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and those who tested negative were only seen in Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (non-Hispanic or Latino vs unknown Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (OR 0.2 95% CI (0.6, 0.9)) and site of testing(inpatient vs outpatient OR 3.1 95% CI (1.3, 7.4)).


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , HIV Infections/virology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , Aged , Anti-HIV Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cities/statistics & numerical data , Comorbidity , Cross-Sectional Studies , Demography , Female , HIV Infections/complications , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/physiology
9.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 13580, 2021 06 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1291169

ABSTRACT

In the DECODE project, data were collected from 3,114 surveys filled by symptomatic patients RT-qPCR tested for SARS-CoV-2 in a single university centre in March-September 2020. The population demonstrated balanced sex and age with 759 SARS-CoV-2( +) patients. The most discriminative symptoms in SARS-CoV-2( +) patients at early infection stage were loss of taste/smell (OR = 3.33, p < 0.0001), body temperature above 38℃ (OR = 1.67, p < 0.0001), muscle aches (OR = 1.30, p = 0.0242), headache (OR = 1.27, p = 0.0405), cough (OR = 1.26, p = 0.0477). Dyspnea was more often reported among SARS-CoV-2(-) (OR = 0.55, p < 0.0001). Cough and dyspnea were 3.5 times more frequent among SARS-CoV-2(-) (OR = 0.28, p < 0.0001). Co-occurrence of cough, muscle aches, headache, loss of taste/smell (OR = 4.72, p = 0.0015) appeared significant, although co-occurrence of two symptoms only, cough and loss of smell or taste, means OR = 2.49 (p < 0.0001). Temperature > 38℃ with cough was most frequent in men (20%), while loss of taste/smell with cough in women (17%). For younger people, taste/smell impairment is sufficient to characterise infection, whereas in older patients co-occurrence of fever and cough is necessary. The presented study objectifies the single symptoms and interactions significance in COVID-19 diagnoses and demonstrates diverse symptomatology in patient groups.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Symptom Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Ageusia/etiology , COVID-19/complications , Child , Child, Preschool , Cough/etiology , Diagnosis, Differential , Dyspnea/etiology , Female , Fever/etiology , Headache/etiology , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Olfaction Disorders/etiology , Pilot Projects , Poland/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/complications , Respiratory Tract Infections/microbiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Symptom Assessment/classification , Young Adult
10.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 148(1): 133e-139e, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1284960

ABSTRACT

SUMMARY: The coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic became a global threat in a matter of weeks, with its future implications yet to be defined. New York City was swiftly declared the epicenter of the pandemic in the United States as case numbers grew exponentially in a matter of days, quickly threatening to overwhelm the capacity of the health care system. This burgeoning crisis led practitioners across specialties to adapt and mobilize rapidly. Plastic surgeons and trainees within the New York University Langone Health system faced uncertainty in terms of future practice, in addition to immediate and long-term effects on undergraduate and graduate medical education. The administration remained vigilant and adaptive, enacting departmental policies prioritizing safety and productivity, with early deployment of faculty for clinical support at the front lines. The authors anticipate that this pandemic will have far-reaching effects on the future of plastic surgery education, trends in the pursuit of elective surgical procedures, and considerable consequences for certain research endeavors. Undoubtedly, there will be substantial impact on the physical and mental well-being of health care practitioners across specialties. Coordinated efforts and clear lines of communication between the Department of Plastic Surgery and its faculty and trainees allowed a concerted effort toward the immediate challenge of tempering the spread of coronavirus disease of 2019 and preserving structure and throughput for education and research. Adaptation and creativity have ultimately allowed for early rebooting of in-person clinical and surgical practice. The authors present their coordinated efforts and lessons gleaned from their experience to inform their community's preparedness as this formidable challenge evolves.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Surgery, Plastic/trends , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Academic Medical Centers/trends , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Education, Medical, Graduate/organization & administration , Education, Medical, Graduate/standards , Education, Medical, Graduate/trends , Elective Surgical Procedures/education , Elective Surgical Procedures/standards , Elective Surgical Procedures/trends , Faculty/organization & administration , Faculty/psychology , Faculty/statistics & numerical data , Forecasting , Humans , Internship and Residency/statistics & numerical data , New York City/epidemiology , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/organization & administration , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/trends , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/education , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/standards , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/trends , Surgeons/organization & administration , Surgeons/psychology , Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , Surgery, Plastic/education , Surgery, Plastic/organization & administration , Surgery, Plastic/standards , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Uncertainty , Universities/standards , Universities/statistics & numerical data , Universities/trends
11.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(5): e23905, 2021 05 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1273304

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many ambulatory clinics transitioned to telehealth, but it remains unknown how this may have exacerbated inequitable access to care. OBJECTIVE: Given the potential barriers faced by different populations, we investigated whether telehealth use is consistent and equitable across age, race, and gender. METHODS: Our retrospective cohort study of outpatient visits was conducted between March 2 and June 10, 2020, compared with the same time period in 2019, at a single academic health center in Boston, Massachusetts. Visits were divided into in-person visits and telehealth visits and then compared by racial designation, gender, and age. RESULTS: At our academic medical center, using a retrospective cohort analysis of ambulatory care delivered between March 2 and June 10, 2020, we found that over half (57.6%) of all visits were telehealth visits, and both Black and White patients accessed telehealth more than Asian patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the rapid implementation of telehealth does not follow prior patterns of health care disparities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Telemedicine/methods , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Boston/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Young Adult
12.
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs ; 47(5): 459-469, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1270772

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe medical device-related pressure injuries (MDRPIs) in hospitalized pediatric patients. DESIGN: A prospective, descriptive study. SAMPLE/SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 625 patients cared for in 8 US pediatric hospitals. Participants were aged preterm to 21 years, on bed rest for at least 24 hours, and had a medical device in place. METHODS: Two nursing teams, blinded to the other's assessments, worked in tandem to assess pressure injury risk, type of medical devices in use, and preventive interventions for each medical device. They also identified the presence, location, and stage of MDRPI. Subjects were observed up to 8 times over 4 weeks, or until discharge, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: Of 625 enrolled patients, 42 (7%) developed 1 or more MDRPIs. Two-thirds of patients with MDRPIs were younger than 8 years. Patients experiencing MDRPIs had higher acuity scores on hospital admission, were more frequently cognitively and/or functionally impaired, or were extreme in body mass index. Respiratory devices caused the most injuries (6.19/1000 device-days), followed by immobilizers (2.40/1000 device-days), gastric tubes (2.24/1000 device-days), and external monitoring devices (1.77/1000 device-days). Of the 6336 devices in place, 36% did not have an MDRPI preventive intervention in place. Clinical variables contributing to MDRPI development included intensive care unit care (odds ratio [OR] 8.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-43.6), use of neuromuscular blockade (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.7-7.8), and inotropic/vasopressor medications (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.7-4.3). Multivariable analysis indicated that Braden QD scores alone predicted MDRPI development. CONCLUSION: Medical devices are common in hospitalized infants and children and these medical devices place patients at risk for MDRPI.


Subject(s)
Equipment and Supplies/standards , Pressure Ulcer/therapy , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/prevention & control , Equipment and Supplies/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pediatrics/instrumentation , Pediatrics/statistics & numerical data , Pressure Ulcer/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors
13.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(6): e2113539, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269080

ABSTRACT

Importance: How the COVID-19 pandemic has affected academic medicine faculty's work-life balance is unknown. Objective: To assess the association of perceived work-life conflict with academic medicine faculty intention to leave, reducing employment to part time, or declining leadership opportunities before and since the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Settings, and Participants: An anonymous online survey of medical, graduate, and health professions school faculty was conducted at a single large, urban academic medical center between September 1 and September 25, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-assessed intention to leave, reducing employment to part time, or turning down leadership opportunities because of work-life conflict before and since the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Of the 1186 of 3088 (38%) of faculty members who answered the survey, 649 (55%) were women and 682 (58%) were White individuals. Respondents were representative of the overall faculty demographic characteristics except for an overrepresentation of female faculty respondents and underrepresentation of Asian faculty respondents compared with all faculty (female faculty: 649 [55%] vs 1368 [44%]; Asian faculty: 259 [22%] vs 963 [31%]). After the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, faculty were more likely to consider leaving or reducing employment to part time compared with before the pandemic (leaving: 225 [23%] vs 133 [14%]; P < .001; reduce hours: 281 [29%] vs 206 [22%]; P < .001). Women were more likely than men to reduce employment to part time before the COVID-19 pandemic (153 [28%] vs 44 [12%]; P < .001) and to consider both leaving or reducing employment to part time since the COVID-19 pandemic (leaving: 154 [28%] vs 56 [15%]; P < .001; reduce employment: 215 [40%] vs 49 [13%]; P < .001). Faculty with children were more likely to consider leaving and reducing employment since the COVID-19 pandemic compared with before the pandemic (leaving: 159 [29%] vs 93 [17%]; P < .001; reduce employment: 213 [40%] vs 130 [24%]; P < .001). Women with children compared with women without children were also more likely to consider leaving since the COVID-19 pandemic than before (113 [35%] vs 39 [17%]; P < .001). Working parent faculty and women were more likely to decline leadership opportunities both before (faculty with children vs without children: 297 [32%] vs 84 [9%]; P < .001; women vs men: 206 [29%] vs 47 [13%]; P < .001) and since the COVID-19 pandemic (faculty with children vs faculty without children: 316 [34%] vs 93 [10 %]; P < .001; women vs men: 148 [28%] vs 51 [14%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, the perceived stressors associated with work-life integration were higher in women than men, were highest in women with children, and have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The association of both gender and parenting with increased perceived work-life stress may disproportionately decrease the long-term retention and promotion of junior and midcareer women faculty.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Faculty, Medical/psychology , Perception , Work-Life Balance/standards , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , Faculty, Medical/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Job Satisfaction , Male , Middle Aged , Schools, Medical/organization & administration , Schools, Medical/standards , Schools, Medical/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Texas , Work-Life Balance/statistics & numerical data
15.
J Racial Ethn Health Disparities ; 9(2): 385-389, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064659

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Studies of COVID-19 have shown that African Americans have been affected by the virus at a higher rate compared to other races. This cohort study investigated comorbidities and clinical outcomes by race among COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit. METHODS: This is a case series of critically ill patients admitted with COVID-19 to an academic healthcare system in Atlanta, Georgia. The study included all critically ill hospitalized patients between March 6, 2020, and May 5, 2020. Clinical outcomes during hospitalization included mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and mortality stratified by race. RESULTS: Of 288 patients included (mean age, 63 ± 16 years; 45% female), 210 (73%) were African American. African Americans had significantly higher rates of comorbidities compared to other races, including hypertension (80% vs 59%, P = 0.001), diabetes (49% vs 34%, P = 0.026), and mean BMI (33 kg/m2 vs 28 kg/m2, P < 0.001). Despite African Americans requiring continuous renal replacement therapy during hospitalization at higher rates than other races (27% vs 13%, P = 0.011), rates of intubation, intensive care unit length of stay, and overall mortality (30% vs 24%, P = 0.307) were similar. CONCLUSION: This racially diverse series of critically ill COVID-19 patients shows that despite higher rates of comorbidities at hospital admission in African Americans compared with other races, there was no significant difference in mortality.


Subject(s)
African Americans , COVID-19 , Critical Illness , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , African Americans/statistics & numerical data , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/mortality , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Georgia , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Race Factors , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
16.
Psychiatry Res ; 298: 113776, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1062564

ABSTRACT

Inpatient psychiatric facilities can face significant challenges in containing infectious outbreaks during the COVID-19 pandemic. The main objective of this study was to characterize the epidemiology, testing data, and containment protocols of COVID-19 in a large academic medical center during the height of the COVID-19 outbreak. A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on hospitalized individuals on five inpatient psychiatric units from March 1st to July 8th, 2020. Demographic data collected include age, race, gender, ethnicity, diagnosis, and admission status (one or multiple admissions). In addition, a Gantt chart was used to assess outbreak data and timelines for one unit. Testing data was collected for patients admitted to inpatient psychiatric units, emergency room visits, and employees. 964 individuals were hospitalized psychiatrically. The study population included ethnically diverse patients with various mental illnesses. We also describe infection prevention strategies, screening, and triage protocols utilized to safely continue patient flow during and beyond the study period with a low patient and employee infection rate. In summary, our study suggests that early implementation of triage, screening, extensive testing, and unit-specific interventions can help prevent and contain the spread of COVID-19 in inpatient psychiatric units and help facilitate safe delivery of care during a pandemic.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers , COVID-19 , Mental Disorders , Psychiatric Department, Hospital , Triage , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Inpatients , Male , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Disorders/therapy , Middle Aged , Psychiatric Department, Hospital/standards , Psychiatric Department, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Triage/standards , Triage/statistics & numerical data
17.
Neurol Sci ; 42(2): 445-453, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1006439

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Some previous reports have shown a reduced number of admission in stroke cases during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic period. The present study aimed to investigate this changing pattern and the potential causes behind it at an academic neurology and neurosurgery center in Iran. METHODS: Patients admitted to our center with the diagnosis of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, between March 1, 2019, Jun 1, 2019, and the similar 3-month period in 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic period), were compared in terms of clinical characteristics and outcome. Poisson regression was also conducted to assess the correlation between daily admissions and the COVID-19 pandemic period. RESULTS: A total of 210 patients with stroke (ischemic and hemorrhagic) in 2019 were compared with 106 patients in 2020. COVID-19 pandemic period was significantly associated with the decline in the number of daily admissions in ischemic stroke (IRR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.4-0.64]). A significant reduction (P = 0.003) in time from onset to arrival at hospital from median 12 h [IQR, 5-32] in 2019 to median 6 h [IQR, 4-16] in 2020 was found in ischemic stroke cases. National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was significantly increased (P < 0.001) from median 4 [IQR, 2-7] in 2019 to median 9 [IQR, 4-14] in 2020. Glasgow coma scale (GCS) was significantly decreased from 13.9 (SD, 2) in 2019 to 12.8 (SD, 2.9) in 2020 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The present study provided new pieces of evidence regarding the changed pattern of hospital admission in stroke especially the possible reasons for its decline.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Hemorrhagic Stroke/therapy , Ischemic Stroke/therapy , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Glasgow Coma Scale , Hemorrhagic Stroke/epidemiology , Humans , Iran/epidemiology , Ischemic Stroke/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index
18.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil ; 102(3): 351-358, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-956096

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to identify functional limitations in patients with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to acute care hospitals; to evaluate functional limitations by demographic, medical, and encounter characteristics; and to examine functional limitations in relation to discharge destination. DESIGN: and Setting:This is a cross-sectional, retrospective study of adult patients with COVID-19 who were discharged from 2 different types of hospitals (academic medical center and a community hospital) within 1 health care system from January 1 to April 30, 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Patients were identified from the Cedars-Sinai COVID-19 data registry who had a new-onset positive test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. A total of 273 patients were identified, which included 230 patients who were discharged alive and 43 patients who died and were excluded from the study sample. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Functional limitations in patients with COVID-19 in acute care hospitals and the predictors for discharge disposition. RESULTS: A total of 230 records were analyzed including demographic, encounter, medical, and functional variables. In a propensity score-matched cohort based on age and comorbidity, 88.2% had functional physical health deficits, 72.5% had functional mental health deficits, and 17.6% experienced sensory deficits. In the matched cohort, individuals discharged to an institution experienced greater physical (62.7% vs 25.5%, P<.001) and mental health (49.0% vs 23.5%, P=.006) deficits than patients discharged home. Marital status (odds ratio, 3.17; P=.011) and physical function deficits (odds ratio, 3.63; P=.025) were associated with an increase odds ratio of discharge to an institution. CONCLUSIONS: This research highlights that functional status is a strong predictor for discharge destination to an institution for patients with COVID-19. Patients who were older, in the acute care hospital longer, and with comorbidities were more likely to be discharged to an institution. Rehabilitation is a significant aspect of the health care system for these vulnerable patients. The challenges of adjusting the role of rehabilitation providers and systems during the pandemic needs further exploration. Moreover, additional research is needed to look more closely at the many facets and timing of functional status needs, to shed light in use of interdisciplinary rehabilitation services, and to guide providers and health care systems in facilitating optimal recovery and patient outcomes.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/rehabilitation , Hospitals, Community/statistics & numerical data , Patient Discharge/statistics & numerical data , Rehabilitation Centers/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Physical Functional Performance , Propensity Score , Recovery of Function , Registries , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Intern Emerg Med ; 16(5): 1141-1152, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-915239

ABSTRACT

Preliminary evidence supports the notion that COVID-19 patients may have an increased susceptibility to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, the magnitude of this association still needs to be defined. Furthermore, clinical predictors of thrombogenesis, and the relationship with the inflammatory status are currently unknown. On this basis, we conducted a retrospective, observational study on 259 consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to an academic tertiary referral hospital in Northern Italy between March 19th and April 6th, 2020. Records of COVID-19 patients with a definite VTE event were reviewed for demographic information, co-morbidities, risk factors for VTE, laboratory tests, and anticoagulation treatment. Twenty-five cases among 259 COVID-19 patients developed VTE (9.6%), all of them having a Padua score > 4, although being under standard anticoagulation prophylaxis since hospital admission. In the VTE subcohort, we found a significant positive correlation between platelet count (PLT) and either C reactive protein (CRP) (p < 0.0001) or lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (p = 0.0013), while a significant inverse correlation was observed between PLT and mean platelet volume (p < 0.0001). Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio significantly correlated with CRP (p < 0.0001). The majority of VTE patients was male and younger compared to non-VTE patients (p = 0.002 and p = 0.005, respectively). No significant difference was found in D-dimer levels between VTE and non VTE patients, while significantly higher levels of LDH (p = 0.04) and IL-6 (p = 0.04) were observed in VTE patients in comparison to non-VTE patients. In conclusion, our findings showed a quite high prevalence of VTE in COVID-19 patients. Raised inflammatory indexes and increased serum levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines should raise the clinical suspicion of VTE.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Retrospective Studies , Statistics, Nonparametric , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL