Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Am Med Inform Assoc ; 30(1): 178-194, 2022 12 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36125018

ABSTRACT

How to deliver best care in various clinical settings remains a vexing problem. All pertinent healthcare-related questions have not, cannot, and will not be addressable with costly time- and resource-consuming controlled clinical trials. At present, evidence-based guidelines can address only a small fraction of the types of care that clinicians deliver. Furthermore, underserved areas rarely can access state-of-the-art evidence-based guidelines in real-time, and often lack the wherewithal to implement advanced guidelines. Care providers in such settings frequently do not have sufficient training to undertake advanced guideline implementation. Nevertheless, in advanced modern healthcare delivery environments, use of eActions (validated clinical decision support systems) could help overcome the cognitive limitations of overburdened clinicians. Widespread use of eActions will require surmounting current healthcare technical and cultural barriers and installing clinical evidence/data curation systems. The authors expect that increased numbers of evidence-based guidelines will result from future comparative effectiveness clinical research carried out during routine healthcare delivery within learning healthcare systems.


Subject(s)
Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Delivery of Health Care , Computers
2.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 80, 2021 02 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33627169

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia is associated with high mortality and may overwhelm health care systems, due to the surge of patients requiring advanced respiratory support. Shortage of intensive care unit (ICU) beds required many patients to be treated outside the ICU despite severe gas exchange impairment. Helmet is an effective interface to provide continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) noninvasively. We report data about the usefulness of helmet CPAP during pandemic, either as treatment, a bridge to intubation or a rescue therapy for patients with care limitations (DNI). METHODS: In this observational study we collected data regarding patients failing standard oxygen therapy (i.e., non-rebreathing mask) due to COVID-19 pneumonia treated with a free flow helmet CPAP system. Patients' data were recorded before, at initiation of CPAP treatment and once a day, thereafter. CPAP failure was defined as a composite outcome of intubation or death. RESULTS: A total of 306 patients were included; 42% were deemed as DNI. Helmet CPAP treatment was successful in 69% of the full treatment and 28% of the DNI patients (P < 0.001). With helmet CPAP, PaO2/FiO2 ratio doubled from about 100 to 200 mmHg (P < 0.001); respiratory rate decreased from 28 [22-32] to 24 [20-29] breaths per minute, P < 0.001). C-reactive protein, time to oxygen mask failure, age, PaO2/FiO2 during CPAP, number of comorbidities were independently associated with CPAP failure. Helmet CPAP was maintained for 6 [3-9] days, almost continuously during the first two days. None of the full treatment patients died before intubation in the wards. CONCLUSIONS: Helmet CPAP treatment is feasible for several days outside the ICU, despite persistent impairment in gas exchange. It was used, without escalating to intubation, in the majority of full treatment patients after standard oxygen therapy failed. DNI patients could benefit from helmet CPAP as rescue therapy to improve survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04424992.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/methods , Disease Outbreaks , Hypoxia/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Hypoxia/virology , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Noninvasive Ventilation , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Treatment Outcome
3.
J Am Med Inform Assoc ; 28(6): 1330-1344, 2021 06 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33594410

ABSTRACT

Clinical decision-making is based on knowledge, expertise, and authority, with clinicians approving almost every intervention-the starting point for delivery of "All the right care, but only the right care," an unachieved healthcare quality improvement goal. Unaided clinicians suffer from human cognitive limitations and biases when decisions are based only on their training, expertise, and experience. Electronic health records (EHRs) could improve healthcare with robust decision-support tools that reduce unwarranted variation of clinician decisions and actions. Current EHRs, focused on results review, documentation, and accounting, are awkward, time-consuming, and contribute to clinician stress and burnout. Decision-support tools could reduce clinician burden and enable replicable clinician decisions and actions that personalize patient care. Most current clinical decision-support tools or aids lack detail and neither reduce burden nor enable replicable actions. Clinicians must provide subjective interpretation and missing logic, thus introducing personal biases and mindless, unwarranted, variation from evidence-based practice. Replicability occurs when different clinicians, with the same patient information and context, come to the same decision and action. We propose a feasible subset of therapeutic decision-support tools based on credible clinical outcome evidence: computer protocols leading to replicable clinician actions (eActions). eActions enable different clinicians to make consistent decisions and actions when faced with the same patient input data. eActions embrace good everyday decision-making informed by evidence, experience, EHR data, and individual patient status. eActions can reduce unwarranted variation, increase quality of clinical care and research, reduce EHR noise, and could enable a learning healthcare system.


Subject(s)
Learning Health System , Clinical Decision-Making , Computers , Documentation , Electronic Health Records , Humans
5.
Eur J Clin Invest ; 50(10): e13333, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32585739

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory biomarkers are useful in detecting patients with sepsis. The prognostic role of resistin and myeloperoxidase (MPO) has been investigated in sepsis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plasma resistin and MPO were measured on days 1, 2 and 7 in 957 patients enrolled in the Albumin Italian Outcome Sepsis (ALBIOS) trial. The association between resistin and MPO levels on day 1, 2 and 7 and 90-day mortality was assessed. RESULTS: Plasma resistin and MPO concentrations were higher at day 1 and decreased until day 7. Both biomarkers were positively correlated with each other and with physiological parameters. Higher levels of resistin and MPO on day 1 were associated with the development of new organ failures. Patients experiencing death at 90 days showed higher levels of resistin and MPO compared with survivors. At day 1, only MPO in the 4th quartile (Q4), but not resistin, was found to predict 90-day death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.55 vs Q1). At day 2, resistin in the Q3 and Q4 predicted a > 40% increase in mortality as also did MPO in the Q4. On day 7, Q4 resistin was able to predict 90-day mortality, while all quartiles of MPO were not. CONCLUSIONS: High levels of MPO, but not of resistin, on day 1 were able to predict 90-day mortality. These findings may either suggest that early hyper-activation of neutrophils is detrimental in patients with sepsis or reflect the burden of the inflammatory process caused by sepsis. Further studies are warranted to deepen these aspects (ALBIOS ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00707122).


Subject(s)
Mortality , Neutrophils/metabolism , Peroxidase/metabolism , Resistin/metabolism , Shock, Septic/metabolism , Aged , Disease Progression , Female , Fluid Therapy/methods , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Sepsis/metabolism , Sepsis/therapy , Shock, Septic/therapy
7.
Intensive Care Med ; 44(12): 2321-2322, 2018 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30374694

ABSTRACT

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The presentation of Table 1 was incorrect. The corrected Table 1 is given below.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...