Comparison of STEMI Door-To-Device Time During the COVID-19 Crisis in a New Jersey Inner City Community Hospital.

As the novel COVID-19 pandemic was on the rise, its impact on the healthcare system was devastating. Patients became more reluctant to present to the hospital and elective procedures were being postponed for patient safety. We wanted to assess the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the door-to-device time in our small community hospital in the heart of Trenton, New Jersey. We created a retrospective study that evaluated all STEMI cases that presented to our institute from January 2018 until the end of May, 2021. Our primary outcome was the door-to-device time. Secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay, ICU admission, length of ICU stay, cardiac arrest, and death during the hospitalization. We studied 114 patients that presented with STEMI to our emergency department, 77 of these patients presented pre-COVID-19, and 37 presented during the pandemic. Our median door-to-device for STEMI cases pre-COVID-19, and during the pandemic were 70 min (IQR 84-57) and 70 min (IQR 88-59) respectively with no significant difference found (P-value 0.55, Mann Whitney Test). It is, however, interesting to note that the number of STEMI admissions significantly decreased during the pandemic era. There are limitations to our study, most noticeably the number of STEMI cases at our small community hospital which limits its generalizability. Moreover, we did not assess other comorbidities which might have confounded our outcomes and we were also unable to follow patients post-discharge to assess the long-term sequela of their STEMI admission. Therefore, more dedicated studies of this clinical conundrum are required to further assess and implement guidelines for the future.

Implementation context and burnout among Department of Veterans Affairs psychotherapists prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The first goal of this study was to assess longitudinal changes in burnout among psychotherapists prior to (T1) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (T2). The second objective was to assess the effects of job demands, job resources (including organizational support for evidence-based psychotherapies, or EBPs) and pandemic-related stress (T2 only) on burnout. METHOD: Psychotherapists providing EBPs for posttraumatic stress disorder in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities completed surveys assessing burnout, job resources, and job demands prior to (T1; n = 346) and during (T2; n = 193) the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Burnout prevalence increased from 40 % at T1 to 56 % at T2 (p < .001). At T1, stronger implementation climate and implementation leadership (p < .001) and provision of only cognitive processing therapy (rather than use of prolonged exposure therapy or both treatments; p < .05) reduced burnout risk. Risk factors for burnout at T2 included T1 burnout, pandemic-related stress, less control over when and how to deliver EBPs, being female, and being a psychologist rather than social worker (p < .02). Implementation leadership did not reduce risk of burnout at T2. LIMITATIONS: This study involved staff not directly involved in treating COVID-19, in a healthcare system poised to transition to telehealth delivery. CONCLUSION: Organizational support for using EBPs reduced burnout risk prior to but not during the pandemic. Pandemic related stress rather than increased work demands contributed to elevated burnout during the pandemic. A comprehensive approach to reducing burnout must address the effects of both work demands and personal stressors.

Implementation context and burnout among Department of Veterans Affairs psychotherapists prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background The first goal of this study was to assess longitudinal changes in burnout among psychotherapists prior to (T1) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (T2). The second objective was to assess the effects of job demands, job resources (including organizational support for evidence-based psychotherapies, or EBPs) and pandemic-related stress (T2 only) on burnout. Method Psychotherapists providing EBPs for posttraumatic stress disorder in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities completed surveys assessing burnout, job resources, and job demands prior to (T1;n = 346) and during (T2;n = 193) the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Burnout prevalence increased from 40 % at T1 to 56 % at T2 (p < .001). At T1, stronger implementation climate and implementation leadership (p < .001) and provision of only cognitive processing therapy (rather than use of prolonged exposure therapy or both treatments;p < .05) reduced burnout risk. Risk factors for burnout at T2 included T1 burnout, pandemic-related stress, less control over when and how to deliver EBPs, being female, and being a psychologist rather than social worker (p < .02). Implementation leadership did not reduce risk of burnout at T2. Limitations This study involved staff not directly involved in treating COVID-19, in a healthcare system poised to transition to telehealth delivery. Conclusion Organizational support for using EBPs reduced burnout risk prior to but not during the pandemic. Pandemic related stress rather than increased work demands contributed to elevated burnout during the pandemic. A comprehensive approach to reducing burnout must address the effects of both work demands and personal stressors.

Association Between COVID-19 Outcomes and Patient Characteristics: A Study in an Inner-City Community Hospital.

Background It has been shown that certain hematological conditions, such as lymphopenia and thrombocytopenia, are associated with increased severity and mortality from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. However, a majority of the previous data came from large institutional centers with high academic output. We aimed to explore the association between patient's characteristics, hematological parameters, and outcomes in admitted persons with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at our community hospital in an inner city. Methods This study is a retrospective chart review designed to evaluate the potential associations between demographic and clinical characteristics of our patient population and their outcomes when testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. The study population included patients hospitalized in the Saint Francis Medical Center from January 2020 to September 2020. This pilot study included 50 out of the 275 hospitalized patients with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during this timeframe. Data collection from the patient's chart included age, sex, comorbidities, admission complete blood cell count, and use of Remdesivir, steroids, and plasma. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included the need for mechanical ventilation and ICU admission. Results In this pilot study, there was an overall mortality rate of 32% (16 out of 50 patients). Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) of 3 points or above was present in 87.5% of the patients in the mortality group versus 41.1% in patients who survived (p = 0.0021). There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between males and females after adjusting for other variables with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.19 (95% CI 0.02-1.80, p = 0.09). There were no statically significant differences in mortality between Caucasians, non-Hispanic, Black, and Latinx patients (p = 0.466). Admission platelets were lower in the mortality group with a mean of 157.7 ± 43.23 (Thou/ul) versus 250.06 ± 93.95 (Thou/ul) in the survivors (p = 0.0005). Admission white blood cell count in the mortality group was lower than the survivor group with an average of 5.93 ± 2.58 (Thou/ul) versus 9.3 ± 4.14 (Thou/ul) (p = 0.0039), respectively. The plasma D-dimer level of 3 mg/L fibrinogen equivalent unit (FEU) or higher was associated with increased mortality. There was no association of C-reactive protein (CRP) with mortality (p = 0.93 and p = 0.54, respectively); however, the CRP level revealed an association with ICU admission (p = 0.03). The use of steroids, Remdesivir, and plasma did not have a statistically significant effect on mortality, ICU admission, or sepsis in our study. Conclusion In this study, older age, higher CCI, and plasma D-dimer level of 3 mg/L FEU or higher were associated with higher mortality among COVID-19 patients. White blood cell count and platelet count were significantly lower in the mortality group in comparison to the survivor group. However, there was no statistical difference in lymphocyte count between the mortality group and the survivor group. COVID-19 patients with thrombocytopenia or serum CRP level of 15 mg/dL or higher were more likely to be admitted to ICU.

Noteworthy Neurological Manifestations Associated With COVID-19 Infection.

March 11, 2020 marked the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, was being reported as a severe respiratory illness. However, since the recognition of this novel virus, there has been a constant realization that it may present or manifest in a multitude of ways. At first, the typical signs and symptoms were what one would expect from a respiratory virus: cough, shortness of breath, and fever. However, as the disease became more prevalent, neurologic symptoms were reported such as headaches, hypogeusia, and hyposmia. This case report aims to add to the growing body of neurologic manifestations by presenting two cases, Bell's palsy and Guillain-Barre syndrome. Each case involves flaccid paralysis as the primary presentation.

Retraction: Noteworthy Neurological Manifestations Associated With COVID-19 Infection.

[This retracts the article DOI: 10.7759/cureus.8992.].

Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors and COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Introduction Increased virulence, the severity of illness, and mortality have all been hypothesized with respect to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Our study aims to assess whether ACEi/ARB use in patients with COVID-19 conferred worsened severity of illness or increased mortality. Additionally, we explore the possibility of an unearthed protective benefit due to their interruption of the RAS signaling pathway as observed in cardiovascular diseases. Methods The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched for studies relevant to COVID-19 severity, mortality, and inflammation in the context of ACEi/ARB use. Eight studies were included with a total of 17,943 patients, 4,292 (23.9%) of which were taking an ACEi or an ARB. The study population was 47.9% female and the average age across all studies was 65. The studies chosen had a sample size of at least 100 patients. Results Mortality outcomes were assessed in six studies and showed no significant difference in mortality among the ACEi/ARB and control groups (odds ratio [OR]: 0.99, 95%CI: 0.48-2.04). Seven studies assessed the severity of COVID-19 and showed no statistically significant difference in disease severity when comparing the ACEi/ARB group to the control group (odds ratio [OR]: 1.30, 95% CI 0.87-1.94). Four studies reported the length of stay with no significant difference between the ACEi/ARB groups as compared to non-users. Four studies included inflammatory markers C-reactive protein (CRP) and D-Dimer, which were noted to be consistently lower in the ACEi/ARB groups when compared to control groups, however, this was not statistically significant. Conclusion Our study found no significant difference in mortality, severity of illness, or length of stay between ACEi/ARB users and non-users with COVID-19 infection. These results support the continuation of ACEi and ARBs in the setting of COVID-19 as advised by the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA). The decrease in CRP and D-dimer suggests a possible protective effect related to ACEi/ARB use in COVID-19, however, more studies with larger sample sizes are needed to establish this effect.

Noteworthy Neurological Manifestations Associated With COVID-19 Infection.

March 11, 2020, marked the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was being reported as severe respiratory illness. However, since the recognition of this novel virus, there has been a constant realization that it may present or manifest in a multitude of ways. At first, the typical signs and symptoms were what one would expect from a respiratory virus: cough, shortness of breath, and fever. However, as the disease became more prevalent, neurologic symptoms were reported such as headaches, hypogeusia, and hyposmia. This case report aims to add to the growing body of neurologic manifestations by presenting two cases, Bell's palsy and Guillain-Barre Syndrome. Each case involves flaccid paralysis as the primary presentation.