Non-COVID-19 intensive care admissions during the pandemic: a multinational registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a large number of critical care admissions. While national reports have described the outcomes of patients with COVID-19, there is limited international data of the pandemic impact on non-COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care treatment. METHODS: We conducted an international, retrospective cohort study using 2019 and 2020 data from 11 national clinical quality registries covering 15 countries. Non-COVID-19 admissions in 2020 were compared with all admissions in 2019, prepandemic. The primary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and standardised mortality ratio (SMR). Analyses were stratified by the country income level(s) of each registry. FINDINGS: Among 1 642 632 non-COVID-19 admissions, there was an increase in ICU mortality between 2019 (9.3%) and 2020 (10.4%), OR=1.15 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.17, p<0.001). Increased mortality was observed in middle-income countries (OR 1.25 95% CI 1.23 to 1.26), while mortality decreased in high-income countries (OR=0.96 95% CI 0.94 to 0.98). Hospital mortality and SMR trends for each registry were consistent with the observed ICU mortality findings. The burden of COVID-19 was highly variable, with COVID-19 ICU patient-days per bed ranging from 0.4 to 81.6 between registries. This alone did not explain the observed non-COVID-19 mortality changes. INTERPRETATION: Increased ICU mortality occurred among non-COVID-19 patients during the pandemic, driven by increased mortality in middle-income countries, while mortality decreased in high-income countries. The causes for this inequity are likely multi-factorial, but healthcare spending, policy pandemic responses, and ICU strain may play significant roles.

Digital literacy as a new determinant of health: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Harnessing new digital technologies can improve access to health care but can also widen the health divide for those with poor digital literacy. This scoping review aims to assess the current situation of low digital health literacy in terms of its definition, reach, impact on health and interventions for its mitigation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search strategy was composed by a qualified medical librarian. Literature databases [Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, and Google Scholar] were queried using appropriate natural language and controlled vocabulary terms along with hand-searching and citation chaining. We focused on recent and highly cited references published in English. Reviews were excluded. This scoping review was conducted following the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley. RESULTS: A total of 268 articles were identified (263 from the initial search and 5 more added from the references of the original papers), 53 of which were finally selected for full text analysis. Digital health literacy is the most frequently used descriptor to refer to the ability to find and use health information with the goal of addressing or solving a health problem using technology. The most utilized tool to assess digital health literacy is the eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS), a self-reported measurement tool that evaluates six core dimensions and is available in various languages. Individuals with higher digital health literacy scores have better self-management and participation in their own medical decisions, mental and psychological state and quality of life. Effective interventions addressing poor digital health literacy included education/training and social support. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is interest in the study and impact of poor digital health literacy, there is still a long way to go to improve measurement tools and find effective interventions to reduce the digital health divide.

Can Intubation Be Improved with Endotracheal Tubes Marked with a Color Scale? Randomized Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess if a color scale in the endotracheal tube (ETT) can help operators to correctly select the size and depth of placement of the ETT and decrease the time required to complete the procedure and compared with the usual numeric ETT scale in a mannequin model. STUDY DESIGN: The study was conducted in eight centers. Each size of the ETT was identified with a different color. The experimental ETTs had two different colored areas, one for the mouthpiece and another to identify where the ETT should be taped above the lip (an area of 1 cm. The operators were trained as part of the protocol using an instructional video. Four clinical scenarios requiring endotracheal intubation were designed and randomly assigned. Each operator had to select the size and depth of ETT based on the birth weight (BW), and then had to perform four intubations. RESULTS: A total of 108 operators performed 432 intubations. No differences were found in the correct placement and selection of the ETT. Median time (in seconds) required for intubation using numeric versus experimental tube was: for ETT Ø NRP (Neonatal Resuscitation Program) 2.5, 11.5 versus 8 (p < 0.001), ETT Ø 3, 12 versus 10 (p < 0.001), ETT Ø 3.5, 15.5 versus12 (p = 0.003), ETT Ø 4, 12 versus11 (p = 0.019). CONCLUSION: No significant difference was observed in the selection and correct placement of the ETT. However, the intubation time was significantly shorter using the experimental ETT. This device could improve the effectiveness of intubation by reducing the time needed to properly place the ETT at mid trachea. KEY POINTS: · It is an innovative intervention to try to solve a great inconvenience of daily practice.. · The study also raises the difficulty in maintaining the ability of endotracheal intubation.. · It proposes a scale that ensures the correct location with a safe fixation zone..

Estrategias de preparación en unidades de neonatología durante la pandemia de COVID-19: Encuesta en maternidades de la Argentina / Preparedness strategies in neonatology units during the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey conducted at maternity centers in Argentina

Introducción. El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar recursos disponibles, guías utilizadas y preparación para la atención de neonatos en maternidades de Argentina durante la pandemia de COVID-19.Método. Estudio transversal mediante una encuesta enviada a equipos médicos y de enfermería. En mayo de 2020, se contactaron instituciones de más de 500 nacimientos anuales en la Argentina, el 58 % del sector público.Resultados. Respondieron 104/147 instituciones (el 71 %). Todas contaban con guías para la atención durante la pandemia, y un 93 % refirió haber recibido capacitación para su uso. No autorizaban la presencia de acompañante en el parto el 26 % de instituciones privadas y el 60 % de las públicas (p < 0,01). El 87 % recomendaba ligadura oportuna del cordón, el 62 % promovía internación conjunta en neonatos asintomáticos, un 70 % recomendaba la puesta al pecho con medidas de protección, y el 23 %, leche materna mediante biberón. El 94 % restringía el ingreso de familiares a Neonatología.Las dificultades incluyeron imposibilidad de contar con habitaciones individuales para neonatos sintomáticos y potencial limitación del personal de salud y equipos de protección personal.Conclusiones. Todas las instituciones conocen las guías nacionales para enfrentar la pandemia. La mayoría cuenta con recursos para respetar las medidas de protección recomendadas. Existe incertidumbre sobre si, ante un aumento significativo en el número de casos, serán suficientes los elementos de protección personal, el personal y el espacio físico disponible en los distintos centros

Introduction. The objective of this study was to analyze available resources, guidelines in use, and preparedness to care for newborn infants at maternity centers in Argentina during the COVID-19 pandemic.Method. Cross-sectional study based on a survey administered to medical and nursing staff. In May 2020, Argentine facilities with more than 500 annual births were contacted; 58 % of these were from the public sector.Results. In total, 104/147 facilities answered (71 %). All had guidelines for care during the pandemic, and 93 % indicated they had been trained on how to use them. A companion was not allowed during childbirth in 26 % of private facilities and in 60 % of public ones (p < 0.01). Deferred cord clamping was recommended in 87 %; rooming-in with asymptomatic newborns was promoted in 62 %; breastfeeding using protective measures was recommended in 70 %; and breast milk using a bottle, in 23 %. In 94 %, family visiting in the Neonatology Unit was restricted.Difficulties included the unavailability of individual rooms for symptomatic newborn infants and a potential shortage of health care staff and personal protective equipment.Conclusions. All facilities are aware of the national guidelines to fight the pandemic. Most have the resources to comply with the recommended protective measures. There is uncertainty as to whether personal protective equipment, staff, and physical space available at the different facilities would be enough if cases increased significantly

Preparedness strategies in neonatology units during the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey conducted at maternity centers in Argentina. / Estrategias de preparación en unidades de neonatología durante la pandemia de COVID-19: Encuesta en maternidades de la Argentina.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to analyze available resources, guidelines in use, and preparedness to care for newborn infants at maternity centers in Argentina during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Cross-sectional study based on a survey administered to medical and nursing staff. In May 2020, Argentine facilities with more than 500 annual births were contacted; 58 % of these were from the public sector. RESULTS: In total, 104/147 facilities answered (71 %). All had guidelines for care during the pandemic, and 93 % indicated they had been trained on how to use them. A companion was not allowed during childbirth in 26 % of private facilities and in 60 % of public ones (p < 0.01). Deferred cord clamping was recommended in 87 %; rooming-in with asymptomatic newborns was promoted in 62 %; breastfeeding using protective measures was recommended in 70 %; and breast milk using a bottle, in 23 %. In 94 %, family visiting in the Neonatology Unit was restricted. Difficulties included the unavailability of individual rooms for symptomatic newborn infants and a potential shortage of health care staff and personal protective equipment. CONCLUSIONS: All facilities are aware of the national guidelines to fight the pandemic. Most have the resources to comply with the recommended protective measures. There is uncertainty as to whether personal protective equipment, staff, and physical space available at the different facilities would be enough if cases increased significantly.

Introducción. El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar recursos disponibles, guías utilizadas y preparación para la atención de neonatos en maternidades de Argentina durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Método. Estudio transversal mediante una encuesta enviada a equipos médicos y de enfermería. En mayo de 2020, se contactaron instituciones de más de 500 nacimientos anuales en la Argentina, el 58 % del sector público. Resultados. Respondieron 104/147 instituciones (el 71 %). Todas contaban con guías para la atención durante la pandemia, y un 93 % refirió haber recibido capacitación para su uso. No autorizaban la presencia de acompañante en el parto el 26 % de instituciones privadas y el 60 % de las públicas (p < 0,01). El 87 % recomendaba ligadura oportuna del cordón, el 62 % promovía internación conjunta en neonatos asintomáticos, un 70 % recomendaba la puesta al pecho con medidas de protección, y el 23 %, leche materna mediante biberón. El 94 % restringía el ingreso de familiares a Neonatología. Las dificultades incluyeron imposibilidad de contar con habitaciones individuales para neonatos sintomáticos y potencial limitación del personal de salud y equipos de protección personal. Conclusiones. Todas las instituciones conocen las guías nacionales para enfrentar la pandemia. La mayoría cuenta con recursos para respetar las medidas de protección recomendadas. Existe incertidumbre sobre si, ante un aumento significativo en el número de casos, serán suficientes los elementos de protección personal, el personal y el espacio físico disponible en los distintos centros.

Postpartum use of oxytocin and volume of placental transfusion: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether oxytocin administered before clamping the umbilical cord modifies the volume of placental transfusion. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. METHODS: Mothers of term infants born vigorous by vaginal delivery with informed consent provided in early labour were randomly assigned to oxytocin (10 IU) given intravenously within 15 s of birth (group 1) or after clamping the umbilical cord 3 min after delivery (group 2). Soon after birth, all infants were weighed using a 1 g precision scale and subsequently placed on the mother's abdomen or chest. At 3 min, in both groups, the cord was clamped and cut, and the weight was again obtained. The primary outcome (volume of placental transfusion) was estimated by the difference in weights. RESULTS: 144 patients were included. There were no differences in the primary outcome: infants in group 1 (n=70) gained a mean weight of 85.9 g (SD 48.3), and in group 2 (n=74) 86.7 g (SD 49.6) (p=0.92). No differences were found in secondary outcomes, including newborns' haematocrit and bilirubin concentrations and severe maternal postpartum haemorrhage. On the advice of the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee, the trial was stopped due to futility at 25% of the planned sample size. CONCLUSIONS: When umbilical cord clamping is delayed for 3 min, term newborn infants born vigorous receive a clinically significant placental transfusion which is not modified by the administration of intravenous oxytocin immediately after birth. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02618499.

Prevalence of Children With Complex Chronic Conditions in PICUs of Argentina: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of children with complex chronic conditions in PICUs in Argentina. To describe the demographic profile, clinical course and outcomes in PICU of children with complex chronic condition in comparison to previously healthy children. DESIGN: Prospective, observational multicenter study. SETTING: Nineteen PICUs located in Argentina belonging to public and private institutions. PATIENTS: All children admitted to the participating PICUs between March 1, 2015, and February 28, 2016. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed 3,483 PICU admissions. The prevalence of complex chronic condition was 48.06% (95% CI, 46.39-49.72). Cardiovascular complex chronic condition was predominant (22.24% [421/1,893]), followed by neuromuscular complex chronic condition (18.75% [355/1,893]) and malignant disease 17.7% (335/1,893). Technologic dependence was present in 22.22% of the patients (372 of 1,674). Predominant admission diagnosis was postoperative (36.6%) and respiratory disease (28.32%). Children with complex chronic condition had higher mortality than previously healthy patients (odds ratio, 2.74; 95% CI, 2.01-3.73). The risk of prolonged stay (≥ 26 d) was also higher (odds ratio, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.10-1.89). Rate utilization of the following devices was higher in patients with complex chronic condition: mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.12-1.63), central venous catheter (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04-1.48), and arterial monitoring (odds ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.09-1.63). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a high prevalence of patients with complex chronic condition in this sample of argentine PICUs. These patients presented higher mortality and resource use than previously healthy children. This information is valuable to understand the impact that patients with complex chronic condition have on PICU performance and enables proper planning of care.

Performance of the Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 Score in PICUs in Argentina: A Prospective, National Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of the Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 score in a population of children admitted to PICUs in Argentina. DESIGN: Prospective, national, multicenter study. SETTING: Forty-nine PICUs located in Argentina belonging to public and private institutions. PATIENTS: All children between 1 month and 16 years old admitted to the participating PICUs between May 15, 2016, and February 15, 2017. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 6,602 patients were enrolled in the study. The observed mortality was 8% (531/6,602), whereas mortality predicted by Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 was 6.16% (407 deaths). The standardized mortality rate was 1.3 (95% CI, 1.20-1.42). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.82-0.85). The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed that the difference between the mortality observed and the mortality predicted by Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 was statistically significant (χ, 135.63; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 score adequately discriminated patients who died from those who survived in our population. However, the observed mortality was higher than predicted by the score. The use of an updated instrument such as Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 will allow an actual comparison between pediatric intensive care provided in the country and care provided internationally. This might also allow future planning of pediatric intensive care services in Argentina.

Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 as a predictor of death risk in children admitted to pediatric intensive care units in Latin America: A prospective, multicenter study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to asses the performance of the Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 (PIM2) score in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in Latin America. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective, observational, multicenter study. We included patients aged 1 month to 16 years old admitted consecutively during 1 year to 34 PICUs in 9 Latin American countries. Discrimination and calibration tests were performed to validate the performance of PIM2 in the entire sample and in different subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 7391 patients were analyzed. Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 predicted 573 deaths, whereas the observed deaths were 663 (P < .001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the entire population was 0.817 (95% confidence interval, 0.808-0.825). The score showed good discrimination. Instead, calibration was inadequate. The difference between observed and predicted deaths for the entire population and across different risk intervals was statistically significant (χ(2) = 121.87; df = 8; P < .001). Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 did not predict mortality correctly in different diagnostic categories (injury, postoperative, and miscellaneous), in children younger than 12 months, adolescents, and patients with chronic complex conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 showed good discrimination, but calibration was inadequate. To use PIM2 for monitoring PICU performance in Latin America, it might be necessary to recalibrate the score locally.

Validación del índice pediátrico de mortalidad 2 (PIM2) en Argentina: un estudio prospectivo, multicéntrico, observacional / Validation of the Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 (PIM2) in Argentina: a prospective, multicenter, observational study

Introducción. El índice pediátrico de mortalidad 2 (Pediatric Index of Mortality 2; PIM2, por sus siglas en inglés) es uno de los puntajes más utilizados para la predicción de la mortalidad en pacientes ingresados en las Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos Pediátricos (UCIP) argentinas. El objetivo de este estudio fue validar el puntaje PIM2 en las UCIP integrantes del Programa de Calidad de Atención de la Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva. Población y métodos. Estudio multicéntrico, prospectivo, observacional, de corte transversal. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes de entre 1 mes y 16 años de edad, ingresados en las UCIP participantes entre el 01-01-2009 y el 31-122009. Se evaluó la discriminación y calibración del puntaje PIM2 en toda la población y en diferentes subgrupos (riesgo de mortalidad, edad, diagnósticos de ingreso). Resultados. Se incluyeron 2832 pacientes. El PIM2 predijo 246 muertes; sin embargo, fallecieron 297 pacientes (p <0,01). La razón de mortalidad estandarizada fue 1,20 (IC 95%: 1,01-1,43). El área bajo la curva ROC fue 0,84 (IC 95%: 0,82-0,86). Se detectaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre las muertes observadas y las predichas para toda la población y en los distintos intervalos de riesgo (χ² 71,02; df 8; p <0,001). También se detectaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre las muertes observadas y esperadas en los pacientes adolescentes (37/22, p= 0,03) y en aquellos ingresados con patología respiratoria (105/81, p= 0,03). Conclusiones. El puntaje PIM2 permite diferenciar adecuadamente los pacientes que sobreviven de aquellos que fallecen. Sin embargo, subvalora el riesgo de muerte en forma global, especialmente en los pacientes adolescentes y en aquellos ingresados por causa respiratoria. Es fundamental considerar estas diferencias al interpretar los resultados.

Introduction. The Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 (PIM2) is one of the most commonly used scoring systems to predict mortality in patients admitted to pediatric intensive care units (PICU) in Argentina. The objective of this study was to validate the PIM2 score in PICUs participating in the Quality of Care Program promoted by the Argentine Society of Intensive Care.Population and Methods. Multicenter, prospective, observational, cross-sectional study.All patients between 1 month and 16 years old admitted to participating PICUs between January 1st, 2009 and December 31st, 2009 were included. The discrimination and calibration of the PIM2 score were assessed in the entire population and in different subgroups (risk of mortality, age, diagnoses on admission).Results. Two thousand, eight hundred and thirty-two patients were included. PIM2 predicted 246 deaths; however, 297 patients died (p < 0.01). The standardized mortality ratio was 1.20 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.43). The area under the ROC curve was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.86). Statistically significant differences were detected between the observed and the predicted mortality for the entire population and for the different risk intervals (χ²: 71.02, df: 8, p < 0.001). Statistically significant differences were also found between observed and predicted mortality in adolescent patients (37/22, p = 0.03) and in those hospitalized due to respiratory disease (105/81, p = 0.03).Conclusions. The PIM2 score adequately discriminates survivors from non-survivors. However, it underscores the overall risk of death, especially in adolescent patients and those hospitalized due to respiratory disease. It is critical to take such differences into account when interpreting results.

Validación del índice pediátrico de mortalidad 2 (PIM2) en Argentina: un estudio prospectivo, multicéntrico, observacional / Validation of the Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 (PIM2) in Argentina: a prospective, multicenter, observational study

Introducción. El índice pediátrico de mortalidad 2 (Pediatric Index of Mortality 2; PIM2, por sus siglas en inglés) es uno de los puntajes más utilizados para la predicción de la mortalidad en pacientes ingresados en las Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos Pediátricos (UCIP) argentinas. El objetivo de este estudio fue validar el puntaje PIM2 en las UCIP integrantes del Programa de Calidad de Atención de la Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva. Población y métodos. Estudio multicéntrico, prospectivo, observacional, de corte transversal. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes de entre 1 mes y 16 años de edad, ingresados en las UCIP participantes entre el 01-01-2009 y el 31-122009. Se evaluó la discriminación y calibración del puntaje PIM2 en toda la población y en diferentes subgrupos (riesgo de mortalidad, edad, diagnósticos de ingreso). Resultados. Se incluyeron 2832 pacientes. El PIM2 predijo 246 muertes; sin embargo, fallecieron 297 pacientes (p <0,01). La razón de mortalidad estandarizada fue 1,20 (IC 95%: 1,01-1,43). El área bajo la curva ROC fue 0,84 (IC 95%: 0,82-0,86). Se detectaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre las muertes observadas y las predichas para toda la población y en los distintos intervalos de riesgo (χ² 71,02; df 8; p <0,001). También se detectaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre las muertes observadas y esperadas en los pacientes adolescentes (37/22, p= 0,03) y en aquellos ingresados con patología respiratoria (105/81, p= 0,03). Conclusiones. El puntaje PIM2 permite diferenciar adecuadamente los pacientes que sobreviven de aquellos que fallecen. Sin embargo, subvalora el riesgo de muerte en forma global, especialmente en los pacientes adolescentes y en aquellos ingresados por causa respiratoria. Es fundamental considerar estas diferencias al interpretar los resultados.(AU)

.(AU)

Validation of the Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 (PIM2) in Argentina: a prospective, multicenter, observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 (PIM2) is one of the most commonly used scoring systems to predict mortality in patients admitted to pediatric intensive care units (PICU) in Argentina. The objective of this study was to validate the PIM2 score in PICUs participating in the Quality of Care Program promoted by the Argentine Society of Intensive Care. POPULATION AND METHODS: Multicenter, prospective, observational, cross-sectional study. All patients between 1 month and 16 years old admitted to participating PICUs between January 1st, 2009 and December 31st, 2009 were included. The discrimination and calibration of the PIM2 score were assessed in the entire population and in different subgroups (risk of mortality, age, diagnoses on admission). RESULTS: Two thousand, eight hundred and thirty-two patients were included. PIM2 predicted 246 deaths; however, 297 patients died (p < 0.01). The standardized mortality ratio was 1.20 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.43). The area under the ROC curve was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.86). Statistically significant differences were detected between the observed and the predicted mortality for the entire population and for the different risk intervals (χ2: 71.02, df: 8, p < 0.001). Statistically significant differences were also found between observed and predicted mortality in adolescent patients (37/22, p = 0.03) and in those hospitalized due to respiratory disease (105/81, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The PIM2 score adequately discriminates survivors from non-survivors. However, it underscores the overall risk of death, especially in adolescent patients and those hospitalized due to respiratory disease. It is critical to take such differences into account when interpreting results.