Primary Infection Site as a Predictor of Sepsis Development in Emergency Department Patients.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a life-threatening condition but predicting its development and progression remains a challenge. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the impact of infection site on sepsis development among emergency department (ED) patients. METHODS: Data were collected from a single-center ED between January 2016 and December 2019. Patient encounters with documented infections, as defined by the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terms for upper respiratory tract (URI), lower respiratory tract (LRI), urinary tract (UTI), or skin or soft-tissue infections were included. Primary outcome was the development of sepsis or septic shock, as defined by Sepsis-1/2 criteria. Secondary outcomes included hospital disposition and length of stay, blood and urine culture positivity, antibiotic administration, vasopressor use, in-hospital mortality, and 30-day mortality. Analysis of variance and various different logistic regression approaches were used for analysis with URI used as the reference variable. RESULTS: LRI was most associated with sepsis (relative risk ratio [RRR] 5.63; 95% CI 5.07-6.24) and septic shock (RRR 21.2; 95% CI 17.99-24.98) development, as well as hospital admission rates (odds ratio [OR] 8.23; 95% CI 7.41-9.14), intensive care unit admission (OR 4.27; 95% CI 3.84-4.74), in-hospital mortality (OR 6.93; 95% CI 5.60-8.57), and 30-day mortality (OR 7.34; 95% CI 5.86-9.19). UTIs were also associated with sepsis and septic shock development, but to a lesser degree than LRI. CONCLUSIONS: Primary infection sites including LRI and UTI were significantly associated with sepsis development, hospitalization, length of stay, and mortality among patients presenting with infections in the ED.

Approach to weight management in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease in a real-life clinical setting.

Objective: Excess adiposity represents a risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD) and progression to end-stage kidney disease. Anti-Obesity Medications (AOMs) are vastly underutilized in patients with advanced CKD because of concerns related to safety and efficacy. This study was conducted to evaluate the real-world approach to weight management and the efficacy and safety of AOMs in people with advanced CKD. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of individuals with Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥ 27 kg/m2 and eGFR ≤ 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 referred to an academic medical weight-management program between 01/2015 and 09/2022. Evaluation of weight-management approaches, body weight change, treatment-related side effects, and reasons for treatment discontinuation were reported. Results: Eighty-nine patients met inclusion criteria, 16 were treated with intensive lifestyle modifications (ILM) alone and 73 with AOMs (all treated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist [GLP1-RA] +/- other AOMs) along with ILM. Patients treated with AOMs had a longer duration of on-treatment follow-up (median 924 days) compared to (93 days) the ILM group. Over 75% of patients treated with AOMs lost ≥5% body weight versus 25% of those treated with ILM. Only 15% of patients treated with AOMs discontinued therapy due to treatment-related side effects. Conclusion: In patients with obesity and advanced CKD, GLP-1RA-based anti-obesity treatment was well-tolerated, effective, and led to durable weight reduction.

The development of an advanced diploma program for palliative care leaders in Chile.

Context: The majority of people with serious health-related suffering in low- and middle-income countries lack access to palliative care (PC). Increased access to PC education is greatly needed. Objectives: This paper describes the process to adapt an advanced PC training course for a Chilean context. Methods: A joint team of intercultural PC educators from the US and Chile conducted a series of key informant interviews and a target audience survey to iteratively design a PC training course in Chile. Results: Eight key informant interviews identified a strong need for formal PC education pathways, confirmed the five central learning domains, and helped to identify potential course sub-topics. A target audience survey of 59 PC providers from across Chile confirmed a strong desire to participate in such a course. Conclusion: Our team of intercultural PC educators adapted an advanced PC course to the unique context of Chilean providers.

Is Acetaminophen Beneficial in Patients With Cancer Pain Who are on Strong Opioids? A Randomized Controlled Trial.

CONTEXT: Pain is common among cancer patients. The evidence recommends using strong opioids in moderate to severe cancer pain. No conclusive evidence supports the effectiveness of adding acetaminophen to patients with cancer pain who are already using this regime. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy of acetaminophen in hospitalized cancer patients with moderate to severe pain receiving strong opioids. METHODS: In this randomized blinded clinical trial, hospitalized cancer patients with moderate or severe acute pain managed with strong opioids were randomized to acetaminophen or placebo. The primary outcome was pain intensity difference between baseline and 48 hours using the Visual Numeric Rating Scales (VNRS). Secondary outcomes included change in morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD), and patients' perception of improved pain control. RESULTS: Among 112 randomized patients, 56 patients received placebo, 56 acetaminophen. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) decrease in pain intensity (VNRS) at 48 hours were 2.7 (2.5) and 2.3 (2.3), respectively (95% Confidence Interval (CI) [-0.49; 1.32]; P = 0.37). Mean (SD) change in MEDD was 13.9 (33.0) mg/day and 22.4 (57.7), respectively (95% CI [-9.24; 26.1]; P = 0.35). The proportion of patients perceiving pain control improvement after 48 hours was 82% in the placebo and 80% in the acetaminophen arms (P = 0.81). CONCLUSION: Among patients with cancer pain on strong opioid regime, acetaminophen may not improve pain control, or decrease total opioid use. These results add to the current evidence available suggesting not to use acetaminophen as an adjuvant for advanced cancer patients with moderate to severe cancer pain who are on strong opioids.

[Paracetamol as an adjuvant to opioids for cancer pain management]. / Paracetamol como coadyuvante a opioides fuertes en dolor oncológico moderado a intenso: ¿es realmente efectivo?

Cancer related pain is one of the most frequent and relevant symptoms in patients with malignant tumors, causing a huge impact in their quality of life. According to the Chilean Public Health System Technical Report of the Cancer Pain Control and Palliative Care Program 2013-2014, 90% of cancer patients admitted to the Program experienced pain, being moderate or intense in 34%. International and local standards recommend the use of strong opioids (morphine, methadone, or fentanyl) associated with adjuvants such as paracetamol as an initial strategy for pain management. This recommendation assumes that the use of combined analgesics could allow the use of lower opioid doses to obtain similar analgesic effect, decreasing the occurrence of opioid side effects. However, this technical report also describes that there is uncertainty about the impact of paracetamol as an adjuvant in patients with cancer pain who are already receiving strong opioids. This review aims to describe the current state of the art regarding the role of paracetamol as a coadjuvant in cancer pain patients.

Paracetamol como coadyuvante a opioides fuertes en dolor oncológico moderado a intenso: ¿es realmente efectivo? / Paracetamol as an adjuvant to opioids for cancer pain management

Cancer related pain is one of the most frequent and relevant symptoms in patients with malignant tumors, causing a huge impact in their quality of life. According to the Chilean Public Health System Technical Report of the Cancer Pain Control and Palliative Care Program 2013-2014, 90% of cancer patients admitted to the Program experienced pain, being moderate or intense in 34%. International and local standards recommend the use of strong opioids (morphine, methadone, or fentanyl) associated with adjuvants such as paracetamol as an initial strategy for pain management. This recommendation assumes that the use of combined analgesics could allow the use of lower opioid doses to obtain similar analgesic effect, decreasing the occurrence of opioid side effects. However, this technical report also describes that there is uncertainty about the impact of paracetamol as an adjuvant in patients with cancer pain who are already receiving strong opioids. This review aims to describe the current state of the art regarding the role of paracetamol as a coadjuvant in cancer pain patients.