RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Prolonged indwelling catheter use is a known risk factor for catheter-associated UTIs (CAUTIs). We sought to reduce catheter use by creating and implementing a trial of void (TOV) algorithm to standardize indwelling Foley catheter removal in surgical patients. METHODS: We partnered with the Departments of General Surgery and Nursing to develop an evidence-based TOV algorithm for a step-down unit at a large urban teaching hospital. Our cohort included patients treated with intra-abdominal, thoracic, vascular, urologic, and gynecologic surgeries. The primary outcome was mean cumulative indwelling urethral catheter patient-days. For example, if 2 patients had catheters for 3 and 7 days, respectively, then cumulative catheter days would be 10. We analyzed changes in catheter use 90 days before and after algorithm implementation. RESULTS: The mean number of hospitalized patient-days before and after algorithm introduction did not differ (32.2 vs 32.0, P = .60). After implementation, mean cumulative catheter patient-days decreased (14.8 vs 9.9, P < .01), as did mean daily number of patients with catheters on the unit (3.7 vs 3.1, P = .02). There was 1 CAUTI before and after algorithm implementation, the latter deemed associated with algorithm nonadherence. Catheter use in a surgical floor control group where the algorithm was not implemented did not differ for any outcome over the same time period (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary approach to standardize catheter care with a TOV algorithm is feasible and effective in reducing catheter use. Further research is needed to determine its impact on CAUTI rate.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal surgical strategy for performing tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients. BACKGROUND: Many ventilated COVID-19 patients require prolonged ventilation. We do not know if tracheostomy will improve their care. Given the paucity of data on this topic, the optimal surgical approach has yet to be elucidated. METHODS: This is a cohort study of 143 ventilator dependent COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy at an academic medical center from April 15th to May 15th, 2020, with follow up until June 1, 2020. We included adult patients admitted to a NYC medical center with COVID-19 who required invasive mechanical ventilation for greater than 2 weeks who were unable to be extubated and determined to have reasonable chance of recovery and fit defined tracheostomy candidate criteria. Patients underwent either a percutaneous tracheostomy (PT) or open surgical tracheostomy (ST) performed by 1 of 3 surgical services. RESULTS: One hundred forty-three patients underwent tracheostomy, 58 (41%) via a ST, and 85 (59%) via a PT. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the 2 groups, except that more patients who had a history of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation underwent PT (11% vs 2%, P = 0.049). There were no statistical differences observed between the PT and ST groups with regard to bleeding complications (3.5%vs 10.3%, P = 0.099), tracheostomy related complications (5.9% vs 8.6%, P = 0.528), inpatient death (12% vs 5%, P = 0.178), discharge from hospital (39% vs 36%, P = 0.751) or surgeon illness (0% vs 0%, P = 1). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The rapid formation of a multi-disciplinary team allows for the efficient evaluation and performance of a large volume of tracheostomies in a resource-limited setting. Bedside tracheostomy in COVID-19 does not cause additional harm to patients if performed after 2 weeks from intubation. It also seems to be safe for proceduralists to perform in this timeframe. The manner of tracheostomy does not change outcomes significantly if it is performed safely and efficiently.
