Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake

Informe de verificación y asesoría en las condiciones del sistema de habilitación de prestadores de servicios de salud hospital San Rafael, municipio de Yolombó

En Colombia todo prestador de servicios de salud debe cumplir con una reglamentación específica para prestar y garantizar un servicio eficaz y eficiente con el propósito de promover la calidad de los servicios de salud en términos de pertinencia, accesibilidad, continuidad, oportunidad y seguridad; para que la atención se oferte y se brinde en las mejores condiciones posibles, todo prestador debe regirse por el Decreto 1011 de 2006 del ministerio de protección social y salud, en el cual se establece el Sistema Obligatorio de Garantía de Calidad de la Atención. En este marco jurídico se realizó un ejercicio de verificación de los estándares del Sistema Único de Habilitación según Resolución 2003 de 2014 del Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social, en la E.S.E. Hospital San Rafael del municipio de Yolombó, el cual se llevó a cabo por 10 estudiantes del diplomado de verificadores de la Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia, y de una docente coordinadora brindándole a la institución asesoría y asistencia técnica basada en el diagnóstico de debilidades y así poder hacer planes de mejoramiento que con lleven a cumplir su objetivo organizacional y cumplimiento de la normatividad vigente.1. Introducción. -- 2. Justificación. -- 3. Antecedentes. -- 4. Objetivos. -- 4.1. Objetivo General. -- 4.2. Objetivos específicos. -- 5. Productos. -- 6. Alcance. -- 6.1. Reseña histórica de la institución. -- 6.2. Plataforma Estratégica. -- 7. Metodología. -- 7.1. Técnicas. -- 7.2. Actividades. -- 7.3. Agenda. -- 8. Diagnóstico. -- 8.1. Programa de Seguridad del Paciente. -- 8.2. Fisioterapia. -- 8.3. Psicología. -- 8.4. Transporte Asistencial Medicalizado. -- 8.5. Esterilización. -- 8.6. Servicio de hospitalización de mediana complejidad. -- 9. Fortalezas y Limitaciones. -- 9.1. Fortalezas. -- 9.2. Limitaciones. -- 10. Resultados. -- 10.1. Recurso humano. -- 10.1.1. Generalidades. -- 10.1.2. Hospitalización mediana complejidad. -- 10.1.3. Esterilización. -- 10.1.4. Fisioterapia. -- 10.1.5. Psicología. -- 10.1.6. Transporte asistencial medicalizado. -- 10.2. Infraestructura, Instalaciones Físicas y Mantenimiento. -- 10.2.1. Generalidades. -- 10.2.2. Hospitalizaciación mediana complejidad. -- 10.2.3. Esterilización. -- 10.2.4. Fisioterapia. -- 10.2.5. Psicología. -- 10.2.6. Transporte asistencial Medicalizado. -- 10.3. Dotación y mantenimiento. -- 10.3.1. Generalidades. -- 10.3.2. Hospitalización mediana complejidad. -- 10.3.3. Esterilización. -- 10.3.4. Fisioterapia. -- 10.3.5. Transporte asistencial medicalizado. -- 10.4. Medicamentos y Dispositivos Médicos. -- 10.4.1. Hospitalización mediana complejidad. -- 10.4.2. Esterilización. -- 10.4.3. Fisioterapia. -- 10.4.4. Transporte asistencial Medicalizado. -- 10.5. Procesos Prioritarios Asistenciales. -- 10.5.1. Programa de Seguridad del paciente. -- 10.5.2. Hospitalización mediana complejidad. -- 10.5.3. Esterilización. -- 10.5.4. Fisioterapia. -- 10.5.5. Psicología. -- 10.5.6. Transporte asistencial Medicalizado. -- 10.6. Historia Clínica y Registros Asistenciales. -- 10.6.1. Hospitalización mediana complejidad. -- 10.6.2. Esterilización. -- 10.6.3. Fisioterapia. -- 10.6.4. Psicología. -- 10.6.5. Transporte asistencial Medicalizado. -- 10.7. Interdependencia de Servicios. -- 10.7.1. Generalidades. -- 10.7.2. Hospitalización mediana complejidad. -- 10.7.3. Esterilización. -- 10.7.4. Fisioterapia. -- 10.7.5. Psicología. -- 10.7.6. Transporte asistencial Medicalizado. -- 11. Conclusiones. -- 12. Recomendaciones. -- 12.1. Generales. -- Anexos. [email protected]

Jornadas Nacionales de Robótica y Bioingeniería 2023: Libro de actas

Las Jornadas de Robótica y Bioingeniería de 2023 tienen lugar en la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Industrial de la Universidad Politécnica de IVIadrid, entre los días 14 y 16 de junio de 2023. En este evento propiciado por el Comité Español de Automática (CEA) tiene lugar la celebración conjunta de las XII Jornadas Nacionales de Robótica y el XIV Simposio CEA de Bioingeniería. Las Jornadas Nacionales de Robótica es un evento promovido por el Grupo Temático de Robótica (GTRob) de CEA para dar visibilidad y mostrar las actividades desarrolladas en el ámbito de la investigación y transferencia tecnológica en robótica. Asimismo, el propósito de Simposio de Bioingeniería, que cumple ahora su decimocuarta dicción, es el de proporcionar un espacio de encuentro entre investigadores, desabolladores, personal clínico, alumnos, industriales, profesionales en general e incluso usuarios que realicen su actividad en el ámbito de la bioingeniería. Estos eventos se han celebrado de forma conjunta en la anualidad 2023. Esto ha permitido aunar y congregar un elevado número de participantes tanto de la temática robótica como de bioingeniería (investigadores, profesores, desabolladores y profesionales en general), que ha posibilitado establecer puntos de encuentro, sinergias y colaboraciones entre ambos. El programa de las jornadas aúna comunicaciones científicas de los últimos resultados de investigación obtenidos, por los grupos a nivel español más representativos dentro de la temática de robótica y bioingeniería, así como mesas redondas y conferencias en las que se debatirán los temas de mayor interés en la actualidad. En relación con las comunicaciones científicas presentadas al evento, se ha recibido un total de 46 ponencias, lo que sin duda alguna refleja el alto interés de la comunidad científica en las Jornadas de Robótica y Bioingeniería. Estos trabajos serán expuestos y presentados a lo largo de un total de 10 sesiones, distribuidas durante los diferentes días de las Jornadas. Las temáticas de los trabajos cubren los principales retos científicos relacionados con la robótica y la bioingeniería: robótica aérea, submarina, terrestre, percepción del entorno, manipulación, robótica social, robótica médica, teleoperación, procesamiento de señales biológicos, neurorehabilitación etc. Confiamos, y estamos seguros de ello, que el desarrollo de las jornadas sea completamente productivo no solo para los participantes en las Jornadas que podrán establecer nuevos lazos y relaciones fructíferas entre los diferentes grupos, sino también aquellos investigadores que no hayan podido asistir. Este documento que integra y recoge todas las comunicaciones científicas permitirá un análisis más detallado de cada una de las mismas

Contemporary use of cefazolin for MSSA infective endocarditis: analysis of a national prospective cohort

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the real use of cefazolin for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infective endocarditis (IE) in the Spanish National Endocarditis Database (GAMES) and to compare it with antistaphylococcal penicillin (ASP). Methods: Prospective cohort study with retrospective analysis of a cohort of MSSA IE treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Outcomes assessed were relapse; intra-hospital, overall, and endocarditis-related mortality; and adverse events. Risk of renal toxicity with each treatment was evaluated separately. Results: We included 631 IE episodes caused by MSSA treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Antibiotic treatment was cloxacillin, cefazolin, or both in 537 (85%), 57 (9%), and 37 (6%) episodes, respectively. Patients treated with cefazolin had significantly higher rates of comorbidities (median Charlson Index 7, P <0.01) and previous renal failure (57.9%, P <0.01). Patients treated with cloxacillin presented higher rates of septic shock (25%, P = 0.033) and new-onset or worsening renal failure (47.3%, P = 0.024) with significantly higher rates of in-hospital mortality (38.5%, P = 0.017). One-year IE-related mortality and rate of relapses were similar between treatment groups. None of the treatments were identified as risk or protective factors. Conclusion: Our results suggest that cefazolin is a valuable option for the treatment of MSSA IE, without differences in 1-year mortality or relapses compared with cloxacillin, and might be considered equally effective

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study (Intensive Care Medicine, (2021), 47, 2, (160-169), 10.1007/s00134-020-06234-9)

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The members of the ESICM Trials Group Collaborators were not shown in the article but only in the ESM. The full list of collaborators is shown below. The original article has been corrected

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat