RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether enhanced daily weekend physiotherapy (EWP) for patients with hip fracture was associated with improved clinical outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed all previously ambulatory adults admitted with hip fracture to our tertiary hospital, comparing 'usual' ('control') care (09/19-03/20) to EWP (09/20-03/21). Outcomes included Day-7 mobility ≥20 m (primary), additional mobility measures, specified postoperative complications, new residential facility placement, acute length-of-stay (LOS) and 30-day death. RESULTS: Amongst 235 eligible patients (128 control, 107 EWP), 66% were female, mean age was 80.4 years (SD 10.5), 20% from residential care and 49% (114/235) were mobilising without aid at baseline (no between-group differences; all p ≥ .20). Median acute LOS was 10 days (IQR 6-15), total hospital LOS was 21 days (IQR 12-37) and 3% (n = 6) died by Day 30. Median Day-7 distance mobilised was 25 m (IQR 7-50) with EWP versus 10 m (3-40) (p = .06). No EWP patients developed pressure injury (0 vs. 6, p = .02); other outcomes were similar between groups. Adjusting for age, residence, baseline cognitive impairment, American Society of Anesthesiologist score and preadmission mobilisation without aids, EWP was independently associated with increased likelihood of mobilising ≥20 m at Day 7 (aOR 1.83, 95% CI 1.04-3.23, p = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced daily weekend physiotherapy was associated with improvement in early mobility, but not other outcomes assessed. These data would be strengthened by randomised controlled trial data exploring more intense physiotherapy, cost-benefit analysis and patient experience measures.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for high-risk pulmonary embolism (HRPE) with haemodynamic instability or profound cardiogenic shock has been reported. Guidelines currently support the use of ECMO only in patients with cardiac arrest or circulatory collapse and in conjunction with other curative therapies. We aimed to characterise the mortality of adults with HRPE treated with ECMO, identify factors associated with mortality, and compare different adjunct curative therapies. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching four international databases from their inception until 25 June 2023 for studies reporting on more than five patients receiving ECMO for HRPE. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. A subgroup analysis investigating the outcomes with curative treatment for HRPE was also performed. The intra-study risk of bias and the certainty of evidence were also assessed. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022297518). RESULTS: A total of 39 observational studies involving 6409 patients receiving ECMO for HRPE were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled mortality was 42.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 37.2% to 48.7%, moderate certainty). Patients treated with ECMO and catheter-directed therapy (28.6%) had significantly lower mortality (p < 0.0001) compared to those treated with ECMO and systemic thrombolysis (57.0%). Cardiac arrest prior to ECMO initiation (regression coefficient [B]: 1.77, 95%-CI: 0.29 to 3.25, p = 0.018) and pre-ECMO heart rate (B: -0.076, 95%-CI: -0.12 to 0.035, p = 0.0003) were significantly associated with mortality. The pooled risk ratio when comparing mortality between patients on ECMO and those not on ECMO was 1.51 (95%-CI: 1.07 to 2.14, p < 0.01) in favour of ECMO. The pooled mortality was 55.2% (95%-CI: 47.7% to 62.6%), using trim-and-fill analysis to account for the significant publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: More than 50% of patients receiving ECMO for HRPE survive. While outcomes may vary based on the curative therapy used, early ECMO should be considered as a stabilising measure when treating patients with HRPE. Patients treated concurrently with systemic thrombolysis have higher mortality than those receiving ECMO alone or with other curative therapies, particularly catheter-directed therapies. Further studies are required to explore ECMO vs. non-ECMO therapies in view of currently heterogenous datasets.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Bleeding of the gastrointestinal tract (BGIT) is a common gastrointestinal emergency. There is no consensus whether this condition should be admitted to medical or surgical discipline. Timing of presentation may also impact patient outcomes due to differences in healthcare resource availability. This study thus aims to investigate the impact of admitting discipline and timing of admission on patient outcomes in BGIT. METHODS: A 2-year tertiary institution database was retrospectively reviewed. Outcome measures included 30-day mortality, 30-day readmissions and rebleeding requiring repeat endoscopic, angiographic or surgical interventions. Secondary outcome measures included time to endoscopy, percutaneous angiographic interventions and surgery. The effect of admission discipline (medical versus surgical) and time of admission (office-hours versus after office-hours) were analysed using a propensity-score-adjusted estimate. RESULTS: A total of 1384 patients were included for analysis, medical (n = 853), surgical (n = 530); during office-hours (n = 785) and after office-hours (n = 595). After propensity-score-adjusted analysis, no significant differences in mortality or readmissions were noted between medical or surgical admissions. Patients admitted under surgery were less likely to sustain rebleeding (P = 0.004) for lower BGIT and had an earlier time to endoscopy for upper BGIT (P = 0.04). Patients admitted after office-hours had similar outcomes with those admitted during office hours apart from a delay in time to endoscopy (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: For BGIT patients, admission to a surgical discipline compared to a medical discipline appeared to have at least equivalent patient outcomes. Patients presenting with BGIT after office-hours were more likely to experience a delay to endoscopy, although it did not affect patient mortality.
