Characteristics, hospital referrals and 60-day mortality of older patients living in nursing homes with COVID-19 assessed by a liaison geriatric team during the first wave: a research article.

BACKGROUND: The infection by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has been especially serious in older patients. The aim of this study is to describe baseline and clinical characteristics, hospital referrals, 60-day mortality, factors associated with hospital referrals and mortality in older patients living in nursing homes (NH) with suspected COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was performed during March and April 2020 of institutionalized patients assessed by a liaison geriatric hospital-based team. Were collected all older patients living in 31 nursing homes of a public hospital catchment area assessed by a liaison geriatric team due to the suspicion of COVID-19 during the first wave, when the hospital system was collapsed. Sociodemographic variables, comprehensive geriatric assessment, clinical characteristics, treatment received including care setting, and 60-days mortality were recorded from electronic medical records. A logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the factors associated with mortality. RESULTS: 419 patients were included in the study (median age 89 years old, 71.6 % women, 63.7 % with moderate-severe dependence, and 43.8 % with advanced dementia). 31.1 % were referred to the emergency department in the first assessment, with a higher rate of hospital referral in those with better functional and mental status. COVID-19 atypical symptoms like functional decline, delirium, or eating disorders were frequent. 36.9% had died in the 60 days following the first call. According to multivariate logistic regression age (p 0.010), Barthel index <60 (p 0.002), presence of tachypnea (p 0.021), fever (p 0.006) and the use of ceftriaxone (p 0.004) were associated with mortality. No mortality differences were found between those referred to the hospital or cared at the nursing home. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: 31% of the nursing home patients assessed by a liaison geriatric hospital-based team for COVID-19 were referred to the hospital, being more frequently referred those with a better functional and cognitive situation. The 60-days mortality rate due to COVID-19 was 36.8% and was associated with older age, functional dependence, the presence of tachypnea and fever, and the use of ceftriaxone. Geriatric comprehensive assessment and coordination between NH and the hospital geriatric department teams were crucial.

Caso clínico: atención integral de las necesidades paliativas en paciente nonagenario con cáncer de pene avanzado y herida tumoral / Case report: comprehensive care of palliative needs in a nonagenarian patient with advanced penile cancer and tumor ulcer

El cáncer de pene es una afección poco común que en el 4-5 % de los casos presenta recidiva local tras penectomía. Las úlceras tumorales son lesiones que aparecen en el contexto de tumores de alto grado de malignidad y/o fase avanzada de la enfermedad oncológica. Se caracterizan por tener un difícil manejo, ya que en la mayoría de los pacientes presentan dolor, mal olor, exudado abundante, sangrado y alto riesgo de infección. El objetivo de este artículo es describir el caso clínico de un varón con cáncer de pene avanzado que presentaba una lesión ulcerada tumoral con curas complejas, en el que se desestimaron medidas activas de tratamiento, optando por un enfoque paliativo. El abordaje del paciente oncológico con una úlcera tumoral supone un gran desafío para el equipo asistencial. El cuidado de las úlceras neoplásicas exige profesionales altamente cualificados en la materia debido a la complejidad y variabilidad de las curas así como la presencia de síntomas derivados. Gracias a la colaboración de todos los miembros del equipo, familia y paciente se controlaron los síntomas derivados de la úlcera tumoral, contribuyendo a la mejora en la calidad de vida en la etapa final de la enfermedad. (AU)

Cancer of the penis is a rare condition that in 4-5 % of cases presents with local recurrence after penectomy. Tumor ulcers are lesions that appear in the context of tumors with a high degree of malignancy and/or advanced phase of oncological disease. They are characterized by difficult management since in most patients they are associated with pain, bad odor, abundant exudate, bleeding, and high risk of infection. The objective of this article is to describe the clinical case of a man with advanced penile cancer who presented with an ulcerated tumor with complex management; active treatment measures were rejected, and a palliative approach was then selected. Approaching a cancer patient with a tumor ulcer is a great challenge for the healthcare team. Caring for neoplastic ulcers requires highly qualified professionals in the field due to the complexity and variability of the cures as well as the presence of derived symptoms. Thanks to the collaboration of all team members, the family, and the patient the symptoms derived from the tumor ulcer were controlled, contributing to improving quality of life in the final stage of the disease. (AU)

Análisis de la sedación paliativa en pacientes mayores hospitalizados: efectividad de un protocolo / Analysis of palliative sedation in hospitalised elderly patients: Effectiveness of a protocol

Objetivo. Evaluar los cambios producidos en la práctica de la sedación paliativa en la agonía en pacientes mayores hospitalizados antes y después de la implantación de un protocolo hospitalario de sedación paliativa. Material y métodos. Estudio retrospectivo descriptivo tipo antes-después de pacientes mayores de 65 años que fueron tratados con midazolam y fallecieron durante la hospitalización en un hospital terciario en 2 trimestres, uno previo y otro posterior a la implantación del protocolo. Se excluyó a aquellos en quienes la indicación de midazolam no fue la sedación paliativa y los ingresados en cuidados intensivos. Se registraron las características de los pacientes y su servicio de ingreso, el consentimiento, la limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico y el proceso de sedación (síntoma refractario, dosis, evaluación y otros medicamentos). Se analizaron las asociaciones empleando la prueba de la chi al cuadrado y la t de Student. Resultados. Se incluyó a 143 pacientes sin diferencias relevantes entre ambos grupos en cuanto a características demográficas ni sintomatología. Se registró la indicación de no reanimación cardiopulmonar en aproximadamente el 70% de cada grupo y el consentimiento para la sedación en el 91% antes y el 84% después del protocolo. Las dosis de inducción y de mantenimiento de midazolam se adecuaban a las recomendaciones en el 1,31% de los pacientes antes y el 10,4% después del protocolo (p = 0,02) y las dosis de rescate en el 1,31 y el 11,9%, respectivamente (p = 0,01). La dosis de midazolam utilizada en pacientes en quienes se usó el protocolo fue significativamente menor que cuando no se empleó (9,86 mg vs. 18,67 mg, p < 0,001). La escala de Ramsay fue utilizada en el 8 y el 12% y el Equipo de Soporte Hospitalario de Cuidados Paliativos intervino en el 36 y el 16% de los casos, respectivamente (p = 0,008). Conclusiones. El uso de midazolam en la sedación paliativa en la agonía mejoró ligeramente tras la instauración de un protocolo hospitalario de sedación paliativa. El porcentaje de sedaciones adecuadas y el proceso general apenas mejoró con el protocolo. Es necesario continuar el proceso de formación y reevaluar la efectividad de estas medidas en el futuro (AU)

Objective. To measure changes in the practice of palliative sedation during agony in hospitalised elderly patients before and after the implementation of a palliative sedation protocol. Material and methods. A retrospective before-after study was performed in hospitalised patients over 65 years old who received midazolam during hospital admission and died in the hospital in two 3-month periods, before and after the implementation of the protocol. Non-sedative uses of midazolam and patients in intensive care were excluded. Patient and admission characteristics, the consent process, withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments, and the sedation process (refractory symptom treated, drug doses, assessment and use of other drugs) were recorded. Association was analysed using the Chi2 and Student t tests. Results. A total of 143 patients were included, with no significant differences between groups in demographic characteristics or symptoms. Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders were recorded in approximately 70% of the subjects of each group, and informed consent for sedation was recorded in 91% before vs. 84% after the protocol. Induction and maintenance doses of midazolam followed protocol recommendations in 1.3% before vs 10.4% after the protocol was implemented (P=.02) and adequate rescue doses were used in 1.3% vs 11.9% respectively (P=.01). Midazolam doses were significantly lower (9.86 mg vs 18.67 mg, P<.001) when the protocol was used than when it was not used. Ramsay sedation score was used in 8% vs. 12% and the Palliative Care Team was involved in 35.5% and 16.4% of the cases (P=.008) before and after the protocol, respectively. Conclusions. Use of midazolam slightly improved after the implementation of a hospital protocol on palliative sedation. The percentage of adequate sedations and the general process of sedation were mostly unchanged by the protocol. More education and further assessment is needed to gauge the effect of these measures in the future (AU)

[Analysis of palliative sedation in hospitalised elderly patients: Effectiveness of a protocol]. / Análisis de la sedación paliativa en pacientes mayores hospitalizados: efectividad de un protocolo.

OBJECTIVE: To measure changes in the practice of palliative sedation during agony in hospitalised elderly patients before and after the implementation of a palliative sedation protocol. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective before-after study was performed in hospitalised patients over 65 years old who received midazolam during hospital admission and died in the hospital in two 3-month periods, before and after the implementation of the protocol. Non-sedative uses of midazolam and patients in intensive care were excluded. Patient and admission characteristics, the consent process, withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments, and the sedation process (refractory symptom treated, drug doses, assessment and use of other drugs) were recorded. Association was analysed using the Chi(2) and Student t tests. RESULTS: A total of 143 patients were included, with no significant differences between groups in demographic characteristics or symptoms. Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders were recorded in approximately 70% of the subjects of each group, and informed consent for sedation was recorded in 91% before vs. 84% after the protocol. Induction and maintenance doses of midazolam followed protocol recommendations in 1.3% before vs 10.4% after the protocol was implemented (P=.02) and adequate rescue doses were used in 1.3% vs 11.9% respectively (P=.01). Midazolam doses were significantly lower (9.86mg vs 18.67mg, P<.001) when the protocol was used than when it was not used. Ramsay sedation score was used in 8% vs. 12% and the Palliative Care Team was involved in 35.5% and 16.4% of the cases (P=.008) before and after the protocol, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Use of midazolam slightly improved after the implementation of a hospital protocol on palliative sedation. The percentage of adequate sedations and the general process of sedation were mostly unchanged by the protocol. More education and further assessment is needed to gauge the effect of these measures in the future.