Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
CJEM ; 26(2): 111-118, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38153655

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Climate change is leading to more extreme heat events in temperate climates that typically have low levels of preparedness. Our objective was to describe the characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of adults presenting to hospitals with heatstroke during BC's 2021 heat dome. METHODS: We conducted a review of consecutive adults presenting to 7 hospitals in BC's Lower Mainland. We screened the triage records of all patients presenting between June 25th and 30th, 2021 for complaints related to heat, and reviewed the full records of those who met heatstroke criteria. Our primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. We used Mann-Whitney U tests and logistic regression to investigate associations between patient and treatment factors and mortality. RESULTS: Among 10,247 consecutive presentations to urban hospitals during the extreme heat event, 1.3% (139; 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.1-1.6%) met criteria for heatstroke. Of heatstroke patients, 129 (90.6%) were triaged into the two highest acuity levels. Patients with heatstroke had a median age of 84.4 years, with 122 (87.8%) living alone, and 101 (84.2%) unable to activate 911 themselves. A minority (< 5, < 3.6%) of patients presented within 48 h of the onset of extreme heat. Most patients (107, 77.0%) required admission, and 11.5% (16) died in hospital. Hypotension on presentation was associated with mortality (odds ratio [OR] 5.3). INTERPRETATION: Heatstroke patients were unable to activate 911 themselves, and most presented with a 48-h delay. This delay may represent a critical window of opportunity for pre-hospital and hospital systems to prepare for the influx of high-acuity resource-intensive patients.


RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Les changements climatiques entraînent une augmentation des épisodes de chaleur extrême dans les climats tempérés qui ont généralement de faibles niveaux de préparation. Notre objectif était de décrire les caractéristiques, les traitements et les résultats des adultes présentant un coup de chaleur à l'hôpital pendant le dôme de chaleur de 2021 en Colombie-Britannique. MéTHODES: Nous avons effectué un examen des adultes consécutifs qui se sont présentés dans sept hôpitaux du Lower Mainland de la Colombie-Britannique. Nous avons examiné les dossiers de triage de tous les patients qui se sont présentés entre le 25 et le 30 juin 2021 pour les plaintes liées à la chaleur et examiné les dossiers complets de ceux qui répondaient aux critères de coup de chaleur. Notre principal résultat était la mortalité à l'hôpital. Nous avons utilisé les tests de Mann-Whitney U et la régression logistique pour étudier les associations entre le patient et les facteurs de traitement et la mortalité. RéSULTATS: Parmi les 10247 présentations consécutives aux hôpitaux urbains pendant l'événement de chaleur extrême, 1,3 % (139; intervalles de confiance [IC] à 95 %) répondaient aux critères de coup de chaleur. Parmi les patients ayant subi un coup de chaleur, 129 (90,6 %) ont été classés dans les deux niveaux d'acuité les plus élevés. Les patients atteints d'un coup de chaleur avaient un âge médian de 84,4 ans, 122 (87,8 %) vivant seuls et 101 (84,2 %) incapables d'activer le 911 eux-mêmes. Une minorité (< 5, < 3,6 %) de patients se sont présentés dans les 48 heures suivant l'apparition de la chaleur extrême. La plupart des patients (107, 77,0 %) ont dû être admis et 11,5 % (16) sont décédés à l'hôpital. L'hypotension au moment de la présentation était associée à la mortalité (rapport de cotes [RC] 5.3). INTERPRéTATION: Les patients atteints d'un coup de chaleur n'ont pas pu activer le 911 eux-mêmes, et la plupart se sont présentés avec un délai de 48 heures. Ce délai peut représenter une fenêtre critique d'opportunité pour les systèmes préhospitaliers et hospitaliers de se préparer à l'afflux de patients à forte intensité de ressources.


Assuntos
Calor Extremo , Golpe de Calor , Adulto , Humanos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Calor Extremo/efeitos adversos , Temperatura Alta , Hospitalização , Golpe de Calor/diagnóstico , Golpe de Calor/epidemiologia , Golpe de Calor/terapia , Hospitais Urbanos
2.
PLoS One ; 18(9): e0291580, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37751455

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Not all patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection develop symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), making it challenging to assess the burden of COVID-19-related hospitalizations and mortality. We aimed to determine the proportion, resource utilization, and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients admitted for COVID-19, and assess the impact of using the Center for Disease Control's (CDC) discharge diagnosis-based algorithm and the Massachusetts state department's drug administration-based classification system on identifying admissions for COVID-19. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we enrolled consecutive SARS-CoV-2 positive patients admitted to one of five hospitals in British Columbia between December 19, 2021 and May 31,2022. We completed medical record reviews, and classified hospitalizations as being primarily for COVID-19 or with incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection. We applied the CDC algorithm and the Massachusetts classification to estimate the difference in hospital days, intensive care unit (ICU) days and in-hospital mortality and calculated sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Of 42,505 Emergency Department patients, 1,651 were admitted and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, with 858 (52.0%, 95% CI 49.6-54.4) admitted for COVID-19. Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 required ICU admission (14.0% versus 8.2%, p<0.001) and died (12.6% versus 6.4%, p<0.001) more frequently compared with patients with incidental SARS-CoV-2. Compared to case classification by clinicians, the CDC algorithm had a sensitivity of 82.9% (711/858, 95% CI 80.3%, 85.4%) and specificity of 98.1% (778/793, 95% CI 97.2%, 99.1%) for COVID-19-related admissions and underestimated COVID-19 attributable hospital days. The Massachusetts classification had a sensitivity of 60.5% (519/858, 95% CI 57.2%, 63.8%) and specificity of 78.6% (623/793, 95% CI 75.7%, 81.4%) for COVID-19-related admissions, underestimating total number of hospital and ICU bed days while overestimating COVID-19-related intubations, ICU admissions, and deaths. CONCLUSION: Half of SARS-CoV-2 hospitalizations were for COVID-19 during the Omicron wave. The CDC algorithm was more specific and sensitive than the Massachusetts classification, but underestimated the burden of COVID-19 admissions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04702945.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/terapia , Estudos de Coortes , Estudos Retrospectivos , Hospitalização
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...