Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(8): e2119580, 2021 08 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1372681
3.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(6): 751-753, 2021 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1263422

RESUMEN

Antibiotic prescribing practices across the Veterans' Health Administration (VA) experienced significant shifts during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. From 2015 to 2019, antibiotic use between January and May decreased from 638 to 602 days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 days present (DP), while the corresponding months in 2020 saw antibiotic utilization rise to 628 DOT per 1,000 DP.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , COVID-19/epidemiología , Hospitales de Veteranos/estadística & datos numéricos , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Humanos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
4.
PLoS One ; 16(4): e0248080, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1199975

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) may positively or negatively impact outcomes in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We investigated the association of ARB or ACEI use with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related outcomes in US Veterans with treated hypertension using an active comparator design, appropriate covariate adjustment, and negative control analyses. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this retrospective cohort study of Veterans with treated hypertension in the Veterans Health Administration (01/19/2020-08/28/2020), we compared users of (A) ARB/ACEI vs. non-ARB/ACEI (excluding Veterans with compelling indications to reduce confounding by indication) and (B) ARB vs. ACEI among (1) SARS-CoV-2+ outpatients and (2) COVID-19 hospitalized inpatients. The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization or mortality (outpatients) and all-cause mortality (inpatients). We estimated hazard ratios (HR) using propensity score-weighted Cox regression. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between exposure groups after weighting. Among outpatients, there were 5.0 and 6.0 primary outcomes per 100 person-months for ARB/ACEI (n = 2,482) vs. non-ARB/ACEI (n = 2,487) users (HR 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.99, median follow-up 87 days). Among outpatients who were ARB (n = 4,877) vs. ACEI (n = 8,704) users, there were 13.2 and 14.8 primary outcomes per 100 person-months (HR 0.91, 95%CI 0.86-0.97, median follow-up 85 days). Among inpatients who were ARB/ACEI (n = 210) vs. non-ARB/ACEI (n = 275) users, there were 3.4 and 2.0 all-cause deaths per 100 person months (HR 1.25, 95%CI 0.30-5.13, median follow-up 30 days). Among inpatients, ARB (n = 1,164) and ACEI (n = 2,014) users had 21.0 vs. 17.7 all-cause deaths, per 100 person-months (HR 1.13, 95%CI 0.93-1.38, median follow-up 30 days). CONCLUSIONS: This observational analysis supports continued ARB or ACEI use for patients already using these medications before SARS-CoV-2 infection. The novel beneficial association observed among outpatients between users of ARBs vs. ACEIs on hospitalization or mortality should be confirmed with randomized trials.


Asunto(s)
Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de la Enzima Convertidora de Angiotensina/uso terapéutico , COVID-19/patología , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/virología , Femenino , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Hipertensión/patología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Puntaje de Propensión , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Tasa de Supervivencia , Veteranos
5.
No convencional | WHO COVID | ID: covidwho-264386

RESUMEN

Patients, clinicians, and hospitals have undergone monumental changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. This time of troubles has forced us to consider the fundamental obligations that neurologists have to our own individual patients as well as the greater community. By returning to our fundamental understanding of these duties we can ensure that we are providing the most ethically appropriate contingency and crisis care possible. We recommend specific adaptations to both the inpatient and outpatient settings, as well as changes to medical and trainee education. Furthermore, we explore the daunting but potentially necessary implementation of scare resource allocation protocols. As the pandemic evolves, we will need to adapt continuously to these rapidly changing circumstances and consider both national and regional standards and variation.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA