Relation of Electrocardiographic Abnormal P-Wave Axis With Stroke Mortality in the General Population.

The link between abnormal P-wave axis (aPWA) and incident ischemic stroke is well established. However, studies examining the association between aPWA and fatal stroke are rare. We hypothesized that aPWA is associated with fatal stroke. We examined the association of abnormal aPWA with stroke mortality in 7,359 participants (60.0 ± 13.4 years, 51.9% women, 49.8% White) without cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. aPWA was defined as any value <0 or >75°. The National Death Index was used to identify the date and cause of death. Cox proportional hazard analysis was used to examine the association between baseline aPWA with stroke mortality. Over a median follow-up of 14 years, 189 stroke deaths occurred. During follow-up, stroke mortality was more common in those with aPWA than those without aPWA (3.5% vs 2.2%, respectively; p = 0.002). In a multivariable-adjusted model, aPWA was associated with a 44% increased risk of stroke mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.44 [1.05 to 1.99]). This association was stronger in men than in women (HR 95% CI 2.29 [1.42 to 3.67] vs 1.00 [0.64 to 1.55]), respectively; p-interaction = 0.04) and among non-Whites than Whites (HR 95% CI 2.20 [1.39 to 3.46] vs. 1.07 [0.68 to 1.69], respectively; p-interaction = 0.09). The annualized stroke death rates/1,000 participants across levels of CHA2DS2-VASc scores were higher in those with than without aPWA. In conclusion, aPWA, a marker of atrial cardiopathy, is associated with an increased risk of stroke mortality, especially among men and non-Whites. Whether intensive risk factor modifications in those with aPWA would reduce the risk of stroke and thus, stroke mortality needs further investigation.

Risk of Transmission of infection to Healthcare Workers delivering Supportive Care for Coronavirus Pneumonia;A Rapid GRADE Review

BackgroundAvenues of treatment currently implemented for Covid-19 pandemic are largely supportive in nature. Non-availability of an effective antiviral treatment makes supportive care for acute hypoxic respiratory failure is the most crucial intervention. Highly contagious nature of Covid-19 had created stress and confusion among front line Health Care Workers (HCWs) regarding infectious risk of supportive interventions and best preventive strategies. PurposeTo analyze and summarize key evidence from published literature exploring the risk of transmission of Covid-19 related to common supportive care interventions in hospitalized patients and effectiveness of currently used preventive measures in hospital setting. Data SourcesCurated Covid-19 literature from NCBI Computational Biology Branch, Embase and Ovid till May 20,2020.Longitudinal and reference search till June 28,2020 Study SelectionStudies pertaining to risk of infection to HCWs providing standard supportive care of hospitalized Covid-19 mainly focusing on respiratory support interventions. Indirect studies from SARS,MERS or other ARDS pathology caused by infectious agents based on reference tracking and snow ball search. Clinical, Healthy volunteer and mechanistic studies were included. Two authors independently screened studies for traditional respiratory supportive-care (Hypoxia management, ventilatory support and pulmonary toileting) related transmission of viral or bacterial pneumonia to HCWs. Data ExtractionTwo authors (TK and SP) independently screened articles and verified for consensus. Quality of studies and level of evidence was assessed using Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine (OCEBM), Newcastle - Ottawa quality assessment Scale for observational studies and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system for grading evidence. Data Synthesis22 studies were eligible for inclusion. In 11 mechanistic studies, 7 were manikin based,1 was in the setting of GNB pneumonia, 2 were healthy volunteer study and 1 was heterogenous setting.Out of 11 clinical studies, 5 were case controlled and 6 were cohort studies. Risk of corona virus transmission was significantly high in HCWs performing or assisting endotracheal intubation or contact with respiratory secretion.(Moderate certainty evidence, GRADE B) Safety of nebulization treatment in corona virus pneumonia patients are questionable(Low certainty evidence, GRADE C).Very low certainty evidence exist for risk of transmission with conventional HFNC (GRADE D) and NIV (GRADE D),CPR (GRADE D),Bag and mask ventilation(GRADE D).Moderate certainty evidence exist for protective effect of wearing a multilayered mask, gown, eye protection and formal training for PPE use (GRADE B).Low certainty evidence exist for transmission risk with bag and mask ventilation, suctioning before and after intubation and prolonged exposure (GRADE C).Certainty of evidence for wearing gloves,post exposure hand washing and wearing N 95 mask is low(GRADE C). LimitationsThis study was limited to articles with English abstract. Highly dynamic nature of body of literature related to Covid-19, frequent updates were necessary even during preparation of manuscript and longitudinal search was continued even after finalizing initial search. Due to the heterogeneity and broad nature of the search protocol, quantitative comparisons regarding the effectiveness of included management strategies could not be performed. Direct evidence was limited due to poor quality and non-comparative nature of available Covid-19 reporting. ConclusionsMajor risk factors for transmission of corona virus infection were, performing or assisting endotracheal intubation and contact with respiratory secretion. Risk of transmission with HFNC or NIV can be significantly decreased by helmet interface, modified exhalation circuit or placing a properly fitting face mask over patient interface of HFNC. Evidence for risk of transmission with CPR, suctioning before or after intubation or bag and mask ventilation of very low certainty. Significant protective factors are Formal training for PPE use, consistently wearing mask, gown and eye protection.

Impact of structured interdisciplinary bedside rounding on patient outcomes at a large academic health centre.

BACKGROUND: Effective communication between healthcare providers and patients and their family members is an integral part of daily care and discharge planning for hospitalised patients. Several studies suggest that team-based care is associated with improved length of stay (LOS), but the data on readmissions are conflicting. Our study evaluated the impact of structured interdisciplinary bedside rounding (SIBR) on outcomes related to readmissions and LOS. METHODS: The SIBR team consisted of a physician and/or advanced practice provider, bedside nurse, pharmacist, social worker and bridge nurse navigator. Outcomes were compared in patients admitted to a hospital medicine unit using SIBR (n=1451) and a similar control unit (n=770) during the period of October 2016 to September 2017. Multivariable negative binomial regression analysis was used to compare LOS and logistic regression analysis was used to calculate 30-day and 7-day readmission in patients admitted to SIBR and control units, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Patients admitted to SIBR and control units were generally similar (p≥0.05) with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics. Unadjusted readmission rates in SIBR patients were lower than in control patients at both 30 days (16.6% vs 20.3%, p=0.03) and 7 days (6.3% vs 9.0%, p=0.02) after discharge, while LOS was similar. After adjusting for covariates, SIBR was not significantly related to the odds of 30-day readmission (OR 0.81, p=0.07) but was lower for 7-day readmission (OR 0.70, p=0.03); LOS was similar in both groups (p=0.58). CONCLUSION: SIBR did not reduce LOS and 30-day readmissions but had a significant impact on 7-day readmissions.

Diastolic heart failure: a concise review.

The concept of "diastolic" heart failure grew out of the observation that many patients who have the symptoms and signs of heart failure had an apparently normal left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction. Thus it was assumed that since systolic function was "preserved" the problem must lie in diastole, although it is not clear by whom or when this assumption was made. Nevertheless, many guidelines followed on how to diagnose "diastolic" heart failure backed up by indicators of diastolic dysfunction derived from Doppler echoardiography. Diastolic heart failure is associated with a lower annual mortality rate of approximately 8% as compared to annual mortality of 19% in heart failure with systolic dysfunction, however, morbidity rate can be substantial. Thus, diastolic heart failure is an important clinical disorder mainly seen in the elderly patients with hypertensive heart disease. Early recognition and appropriate therapy of diastolic dysfunction is advisable to prevent further progression to diastolic heart failure and death. There is no specific therapy to improve LV diastolic function directly. Medical therapy of diastolic dysfunction is often empirical and lacks clear-cut pathophysiologic concepts. Nevertheless, there is growing evidence that calcium channel blockers, beta-blockers, ACE-inhibitors and ARB as well as nitric oxide donors can be beneficial. Treatment of the underlying disease is currently the most important therapeutic approach.