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.
Cardiology ; 146(4): 481-488, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33902039

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular comorbidities may predispose to adverse outcomes in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, across the USA, the burden of cardiovascular comorbidities varies significantly. Whether clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 differ between regions has not yet been studied systematically. Here, we report differences in underlying cardiovascular comorbidities and clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Texas and in New York state. METHODS: We established a multicenter retrospective registry including patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 15 and July 12, 2020. Demographic and clinical data were manually retrieved from electronic medical records. We focused on the following outcomes: mortality, need for pharmacologic circulatory support, need for mechanical ventilation, and need for hemodialysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Patients in the Texas cohort (n = 296) were younger (57 vs. 63 years, p value <0.001), they had a higher BMI (30.3 kg/m2 vs. 28.5 kg/m2, p = 0.015), and they had higher rates of diabetes mellitus (41 vs. 30%; p = 0.014). In contrast, patients in the New York state cohort (n = 218) had higher rates of coronary artery disease (19 vs. 10%, p = 0.005) and atrial fibrillation (11 vs. 5%, p = 0.012). Pharmacologic circulatory support, mechanical ventilation, and hemodialysis were more frequent in the Texas cohort (21 vs. 13%, p = 0.020; 30 vs. 12%, p < 0.001; and 11 vs. 5%, p = 0.009, respectively). In-hospital mortality was similar between the 2 cohorts (16 vs. 18%, p = 0.469). After adjusting for differences in underlying comorbidities, only the use of mechanical ventilation remained significantly higher in the participating Texas hospitals (odds ratios [95% CI]: 3.88 [1.23, 12.24]). Median time to pharmacologic circulatory support was 8 days (interquartile range: 2, 13.8) in the Texas cohort compared to 1 day (0, 3) in the New York state cohort, while median time to in-hospital mortality was 16 days (10, 25.5) and 7 days (4, 14), respectively (both p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher in the late versus the early study phase in the New York state cohort (24 vs. 14%, p = 0.050), while it was similar between the 2 phases in the Texas cohort (16 vs. 15%, p = 0.741). CONCLUSIONS: Geographical differences, including practice pattern variations and the impact of disease burden on provision of health care, are important for the evaluation of COVID-19 outcomes. Unadjusted data may cause bias affecting future regulatory policies and proper allocation of resources.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Doenças Cardiovasculares , Comorbidade , Hospitalização , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , New York/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Texas/epidemiologia
2.
HERD ; 10(2): 104-123, 2017 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27756860

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Increasingly, architectural and allied designers, engineers, and healthcare facility administrators are being challenged to demonstrate success in adroitly identifying and contextualizing ever-shifting and expanding spheres of knowledge with respect to the role of energy conservation and carbon neutrality in healthcare treatment environments and their immediate exterior environs. AIM: This calls for making sense of an unprecedented volume of information on building energy usage and interdigitizing complex and at times contradictory goals with the daily requirements of building occupants. Ecohumanist Design Strategies: In response, a multidimensional framework is put forth with the aim of advancing theory and practice in the realm of designers', direct caregivers', and administrators' engagement with ecohumanist design strategies in the creation of ecohumanist healthcare environments. CONCLUSIONS: Ten territories for engagement are presented that both individually and collectively express salient themes and streams of inquiry in theory and practice, within an operative framework placing the patient, the patient's significant others, and the caregiver at the center of the relationship between the built environment and occupant well-being.


Assuntos
Conservação de Recursos Energéticos/métodos , Arquitetura de Instituições de Saúde/métodos , Ambiente de Instituições de Saúde/métodos , Cuidadores/psicologia , Família/psicologia , Humanos , Pacientes/psicologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...