Analysis of traumatic event emergency department visits among care home residents aged 65 + years in Southern Jutland, Denmark: implications for comprehensive care and subsequent hospital admissions - a register-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Care home residents aged 65 + years frequently experience acute health issues, leading to emergency department visits. Falls and associated injuries are a common cause of these visits and falls in a geriatric population can be a symptom of an incipient acute illness such as infection. Conversely, the traumatic event can cause illnesses to arise due to consequences of the fall, e.g. delirium or constipation due to opioid use. We hypothesised that a traumatic event treat-and-release emergency department visit serves as an indicator for an upcoming acute hospital admission due to non-trauma-related conditions. METHODS: We studied emergency department visits for traumatic events among all care home residents aged 65+ (n = 2601) living in Southern Jutland, Denmark, from 2018 to 2019. Data from highly valid national registers were used to evaluate diagnoses, mortality, and admissions. Cox Regression was used to analyse the hazard of acute hospital admission following an emergency department treat-and-release visit. RESULTS: Most visits occurred on weekdays and during day shifts, and 72.0% were treated and released within 6 h. Contusions, open wounds, and femur fractures were the most common discharge diagnoses, accounting for 53.3% of all cases (n = 703). In-hospital mortality was 2.3%, and 30-day mortality was 10.4%. Among treat-and-release visits (n = 506), 25% resulted in a new hospital referral within 30 days, hereof 13% treat-and-release revisits (duration ≤ 6 h), and 12% hospital admissions (duration > 6 h). Over half (56%) of new hospital referrals were initiated within the first seven days of discharge. Almost three-fourths of subsequent admissions were caused by various diseases. The hazard ratio of acute hospital admissions was 2.20 (95% CI: 1.52-3.17) among residents with a recent traumatic event treat-and-release visit compared to residents with no recent traumatic event treat-and-release visit. CONCLUSION: Traumatic event treat-and-release visits among care home residents serve as an indicator for subsequent hospitalisations, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive evaluation, even for minor injuries. These findings have implications for improving care, continuity, and resource utilisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not relevant.

Using BCG Vaccine to Enhance Nonspecific Protection of Health Care Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The BCG (Bacillus Calmette-Guérin) vaccine can induce nonspecific protection against unrelated infections. We aimed to test the effect of BCG on absenteeism and health of Danish health care workers (HCWs) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial included 1221 HCWs from 9 Danish hospitals. Participants were randomized 1:1 to standard dose BCG or placebo. Primary outcome was days of unplanned absenteeism. Main secondary outcomes were incidence of COVID-19, all-cause hospitalization, and infectious disease episodes. RESULTS: There was no significant effect of BCG on unplanned absenteeism. Mean number of days absent per 1000 workdays was 20 in the BCG group and 17 in the placebo group (risk ratio, 1.23; 95% credibility interval, 0.98-1.53). BCG had no effect on incidence of COVID-19 or all-cause hospitalization overall. In secondary analyses BCG revaccination was associated with higher COVID-19 incidence (hazard ratio [HR], 2.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-5.71), but also reduced risk of hospitalization (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, .09-.86). The incidence of infectious disease episodes was similar between randomization groups (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, .96-1.24). CONCLUSIONS: In this relatively healthy cohort of HCWs, there was no overall effect of BCG on any of the study outcomes. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT0437329 and EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT number 2020-001888-90).

Associations between care home residents' characteristics and acute hospital admissions - a retrospective, register-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Care home residents are frail, multi-morbid, and have an increased risk of experiencing acute hospitalisations and adverse events. This study contributes to the discussion on preventing acute admissions from care homes. We aim to describe the residents' health characteristics, survival after care home admission, contacts with the secondary health care system, patterns of admissions, and factors associated with acute hospital admissions. METHOD: Data on all care home residents aged 65 + years living in Southern Jutland in 2018-2019 (n = 2601) was enriched with data from highly valid Danish national health registries to obtain information on characteristics and hospitalisations. Characteristics of care home residents were assessed by sex and age group. Factors associated with acute admissions were analysed using Cox Regression. RESULTS: Most care home residents were women (65.6%). Male residents were younger at the time of care home admission (mean 80.6 vs. 83.7 years), had a higher prevalence of morbidities, and shorter survival after care home admission. The 1-year survival was 60.8% and 72.3% for males and females, respectively. Median survival was 17.9 months and 25.9 months for males and females, respectively. The mean rate of acute hospitalisations was 0.56 per resident-year. One in four (24.4%) care home residents were discharged from the hospital within 24 h. The same proportion was readmitted within 30 days of discharge (24.6%). Admission-related mortality was 10.9% in-hospital and 13.0% 30 days post-discharge. Male sex was associated with acute hospital admissions, as was a medical history of various cardiovascular diseases, cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and osteoporosis. In contrast, a medical history of dementia was associated with fewer acute admissions. CONCLUSION: This study highlights some of the major characteristics of care home residents and their acute hospitalisations and contributes to the ongoing discussion on improving or preventing acute admissions from care homes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not relevant.

Limitation of life-sustaining treatment and patient involvement in decision-making: a retrospective study of a Danish COVID-19 patient cohort.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the risk of an extensive overload of the healthcare systems have elucidated the need to make decisions on the level of life-sustaining treatment for patients requiring hospitalisation. The purpose of the study was to investigate the proportion and characteristics of COVID-19 patients with limitation of life-sustaining treatment decisions and the degree of patient involvement in the decisions. METHODS: A retrospective observational descriptive study was conducted in three Danish regional hospitals, looking at all patients ≥ 18 years of age admitted in 2020 with COVID-19 as the primary diagnosis. Lists of hospitalised patients admitted due to COVID-19 were extracted. The data registration included age, gender, comorbidities, including mental state, body mass index, frailty, recent hospital admissions, COVID-19 life-sustaining treatment, ICU admission, decisions on limitations of life-sustaining treatment before and during current hospitalisation, hospital length of stay, and hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 476 patients were included. For 7% (33/476), a decision about limitation of life-sustaining treatment had been made prior to hospital admission. At the time of admission, one or more limitations of life-sustaining treatment were registered for 16% (75/476) of patients. During the admission, limitation decisions were made for an additional 11 patients, totaling 18% (86/476). For 40% (34/86), the decisions were either made by or discussed with the patient. The decisions not made by patients were made by physicians. For 36% (31/86), no information was disclosed about patient involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Life-sustaining treatment limitation decisions were made for 18% of a COVID-19 patient cohort. Hereof, more than a third of the decisions had been made before hospital admission. Many records lacked information on patient involvement in the decisions.

Using BCG vaccine to enhance non-specific protection of health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial in Denmark.

OBJECTIVES: The Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine against tuberculosis is associated with non- specific protective effects against other infections, and significant reductions in all-cause morbidity and mortality have been reported. We aim to test whether BCG vaccination may reduce susceptibility to and/or the severity of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases in health care workers (HCW) and thus prevent work absenteeism.The primary objective is to reduce absenteeism due to illness among HCW during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary objectives are to reduce the number of HCW that are infected with SARS-CoV-2, and to reduce the number of hospital admissions among HCW during the COVID-19 pandemic. HYPOTHESIS: BCG vaccination of HCW will reduce absenteeism by 20% over a period of 6 months. TRIAL DESIGN: Placebo-controlled, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial, recruiting study participants at several geographic locations. The BCG vaccine is used in this study on a different indication than the one it has been approved for by the Danish Medicines Agency, therefore this is classified as a phase III study. PARTICIPANTS: The trial will recruit 1,500 HCW at Danish hospitals.To be eligible for participation, a subject must meet the following criteria: Adult (≥18 years); Hospital personnel working at a participating hospital for more than 22 hours per week.A potential subject who meets any of the following criteria will be excluded from participation in this study: Known allergy to components of the BCG vaccine or serious adverse events to prior BCG administration Known prior active or latent infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis) or other mycobacterial species Previous confirmed COVID-19 Fever (>38 C) within the past 24 hours Suspicion of active viral or bacterial infection Pregnancy Breastfeeding Vaccination with other live attenuated vaccine within the last 4 weeks Severely immunocompromised subjects. This exclusion category comprises: a) subjects with known infection by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1) b) subjects with solid organ transplantation c) subjects with bone marrow transplantation d) subjects under chemotherapy e) subjects with primary immunodeficiency f) subjects under treatment with any anti-cytokine therapy within the last year g) subjects under treatment with oral or intravenous steroids defined as daily doses of 10 mg prednisone or equivalent for longer than 3 months h) Active solid or non-solid malignancy or lymphoma within the prior two years Direct involvement in the design or the execution of the BCG-DENMARK-COVID trial Intervention and comparator: Participants will be randomised to BCG vaccine (BCG-Denmark, AJ Vaccines, Copenhagen, Denmark) or placebo (saline). An adult dose of 0.1 ml of resuspended BCG vaccine (intervention) or 0.1 ml of sterile 0.9% NaCl solution (control) is administered intradermally in the upper deltoid area of the right arm. All participants will receive one injection at inclusion, and no further treatment of study participants will take place. MAIN OUTCOMES: Main study endpoint: Days of unplanned absenteeism due to illness within 180 days of randomisation.Secondary study endpoints: The cumulative incidence of documented COVID-19 and the cumulative incidence of hospital admission for any reason within 180 days of randomisation.Randomisation: Randomisation will be done centrally using the REDCap tool with stratification by hospital, sex and age groups (+/- 45 years of age) in random blocks of 4 and 6. The allocation ratio is 1:1.Blinding (masking): Participants will be blinded to treatment. The participant will be asked to leave the room while the allocated treatment is prepared. Once ready for injection, vaccine and placebo will look similar, and the participant will not be able to tell the difference.The physicians administering the treatment are not blinded.Numbers to be randomised (sample size): Sample size: N=1,500. The 1,500 participants will be randomised 1:1 to BCG or placebo with 750 participants in each group.Trial Status: Current protocol version 5.1, from July 6, 2020.Recruitment of study participants started on May 18, 2020 and we anticipate having finished recruiting by the end of December 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with EudraCT on April 16, 2020, EudraCT number: 2020-001888-90, and with ClinicalTrials.gov on May 1, 2020, registration number NCT04373291.Full protocol: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trialswebsite (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

The value of random biopsies, omentectomy, and hysterectomy in operations for borderline ovarian tumors.

OBJECTIVE: Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) are treated surgically like malignant ovarian tumors with hysterectomy, salpingectomy, omentectomy, and multiple random peritoneal biopsies in addition to removal of the ovaries. It is, however, unknown how often removal of macroscopically normal-appearing tissues leads to the finding of microscopic disease. To evaluate the value of random biopsies, omentectomy, and hysterectomy in operations for BOT, the macroscopic and microscopic findings in a cohort of these patients were reviewed retrospectively. MATERIALS: Women treated for BOT at Odense University Hospital from 2007 to 2011 were eligible for this study. Data were extracted from electronic records. Intraoperative assessment of tumor spread (macroscopic disease) and the microscopic evaluation of removed tissues were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: The study included 75 patients, 59 (78.7%) in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I, 9 (12%) in stage II, and 7 (9.3%) in stage III. The histologic subtypes were serous (68%), mucinous (30.7%), and Brenner type (1.3%). Macroscopically radical surgery was performed in 62 patients (82.7%), and 46 (61.3%) received complete staging. The surgeon's identification of macroscopic tumor spread to the contralateral ovary and the peritoneum had a sensitivity of 88% and 69.2% and a specificity of 90.2% and 92.5%, respectively. The macroscopic assessment of the uterine surface, the omentum, and the pelvic and para-aortal lymph nodes was not a good predictor of microscopic disease. During follow-up, 4 patients (5.3%) relapsed with no relation to surgical radicality or the extent of staging procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Ovaries and peritoneal surfaces with a macroscopically normal appearance rarely contain a microscopic focus of BOT.