205 research outputs found

    Strategies for increasing diagnostic yield of community-onset bacteraemia within the emergency department: A retrospective study

    Get PDF
    Bloodstream infections (BSI) are associated with high mortality. Therefore, reliable methods of detection are of paramount importance. Efficient strategies to improve diagnostic yield of bacteraemia within the emergency department (ED) are needed. We conducted a retrospective analysis of all ED encounters in a high-volume, city-centre university hospital within Germany during a five-year study period from October 2013 to September 2018. A time-series analysis was conducted for all ED encounters in which blood cultures (BCs) were collected. BC detection rates and diagnostic yield of community-onset bacteraemia were compared during the study period (which included 45 months prior to the start of a new diagnostic Antibiotic Stewardship (ABS) bundle and 15 months following its implementation). BCs were obtained from 5,191 out of 66,879 ED admissions (7.8%). Bacteraemia was detected in 1,013 encounters (19.5% of encounters where BCs were obtained). The overall yield of true bacteraemia (defined as yielding clinically relevant pathogens) was 14.4%. The new ABS-related diagnostic protocol resulted in an increased number of hospitalised patients with BCs collected in the ED (18% compared to 12.3%) and a significant increase in patients with two or more BC sets taken (59% compared to 25.4%), which resulted in an improved detection rate of true bacteraemia (2.5% versus 1.8% of hospital admissions) without any decrease in diagnostic yield. This simultaneous increase in BC rates without degradation of yield was a valuable finding that indicated success of this strategy. Thus, implementation of the new diagnostic ABS bundle within the ED, which included the presence of a skilled infectious disease (ID) team focused on obtaining BCs, appeared to be a valuable tool for the accurate and timely detection of community-onset bacteraemia

    Postextrasystolic Blood Pressure Potentiation Predicts Poor Outcome of Cardiac Patients

    Get PDF
    Background Postextrasystolic blood pressure potentiation (PESP), the pulse wave augmentation after an extrasystolic beat, is typically enhanced in heart failure (HF) patients. This study prospectively tested the association of PESP and mortality in cardiac patients. Methods and Results Consecutive patients (n=941; mean age, 61 years; 19% female) presenting with acute myocardial infarction were enrolled between May 2000 and March 2005 and followed up until August 2010. The main study outcome was 5-year all-cause mortality. Patients underwent noninvasive 30-minute recordings of ECG and continuous blood pressure. PESP presence was based on the ratio between the first postectopic pulse wave amplitude and the mean of the subsequent 9 pulse wave amplitudes. A ratio above 1 was prospectively defined as PESP present. Ventricular premature complexes (VPCs) suitable for PESP quantification were present in recordings of 220 patients. PESP was present in 62 of these patients. Patients without suitable VPCs were classified as PESP absent. During the follow-up, 72 patients died. Among the 220 patients in whom PESP was measurable, 27 died. Under univariable analysis, PESP was a significant predictor of death (P<0.001) as were GRACE score (P<0.001), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (P<0.001), and the number of recorded VPCs (P<0.001). Under multivariable analysis, PESP (P<0.001), GRACE score (P<0.001), and LVEF (P=0.001) were independently associated with outcome. The combination of PESP presence and LVEF ≤35% identified a subgroup of patients with a particularly high mortality of 46.7%. Separate validation reproduced the finding in an unrelated population of 146 HF patients. Conclusions PESP, which likely reflects abnormalities of myocardial calcium cycling, predicts the mortality risk in postinfarction patients

    Medical and cardio-vascular emergency department visits during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: is there a collateral damage? A retrospective routine data analysis

    Get PDF
    Background In this retrospective routine data analysis, we investigate the number of emergency department (ED) consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 in Germany compared to the previous year with a special focus on numbers of myocardial infarction and acute heart failure. Methods Aggregated case numbers for the two consecutive years 2019 and 2020 were obtained from 24 university hospitals and 9 non-university hospitals in Germany and assessed by age, gender, triage scores, disposition, care level and by ICD-10 codes including the tracer diagnoses myocardial infarction (I21) and heart failure (I50). Results A total of 2,216,627 ED consultations were analyzed, of which 1,178,470 occurred in 2019 and 1,038,157 in 2020. The median deviation in case numbers between 2019 and 2020 was - 14% [CI (- 11)-(- 16)]. After a marked drop in all cases in the first COVID-19 wave in spring 2020, case numbers normalized during the summer Thereafter starting in calendar week 39 case numbers constantly declined until the end of the year 2020. The decline in case numbers predominantly concerned younger [- 16%; CI (- 13)-(- 19)], less urgent [- 18%; CI (- 12)-(- 22)] and non-admitted cases [- 17%; CI (- 13)-(- 20)] in particular during the second wave. During the entire observation period admissions for chest pain [- 13%; CI (- 21)-2], myocardial infarction [- 2%; CI (- 9)-11] and heart failure [- 2%; CI (- 10)-6] were less affected and remained comparable to the previous year. Conclusions ED visits were noticeably reduced during both SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves in Germany but cardiovascular diagnoses were less affected and no refractory increase was noted. However, long-term effects cannot be ruled out and need to be analysed in future studies. [GRAPHICS]

    Risk of Serious Infections in Patients with Psoriasis on Biologic Therapies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    Get PDF
    A comprehensive evaluation of the risk of serious infections in biologic therapies for psoriasis is lacking. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies reporting serious infections in people taking any licensed biologic therapy for psoriasis compared with those taking placebo, nonbiologic therapy, or other biologic therapies. The quality of the studies was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. No significant heterogeneity was detected in data from 32 RCTs (n = 13,359 participants) and one cohort study (n = 4,993 participants). In adults, low- to very-low-quality RCT data showed no significant difference between any biologic therapy and placebo at weeks 12–16 (overall pooled Peto odds ratio = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = 0.36–1.41) and weeks 20–30 (odds ratio = 2.27, 95% confidence interval = 0.45–11.49). No significant differences were found in any of the other comparisons in underpowered RCT data. Prospective cohort study data of low quality suggests that only adalimumab (adjusted hazard ratio [adjHR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval = 1.47–4.32) was associated with a significantly higher risk of serious infection compared with retinoid and/or phototherapy in adults. No association between biologic therapies and serious infections in patients with psoriasis who were eligible for RCTs was detected. Further observational studies are needed to inform the uncertainty around this risk in the real world

    Off-Label Biologic Regimens in Psoriasis: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of Dose Escalation, Reduction, and Interrupted Biologic Therapy

    Get PDF
    Objectives: While off-label dosing of biologic treatments may be necessary in selected psoriasis patients, no systematic review exists to date that synthesizes the efficacy and safety of these off-label dosing regimens. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate efficacy and safety of off-label dosing regimens (dose escalation, dose reduction, and interrupted treatment) with etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, ustekinumab, and alefacept for psoriasis treatment

    Biological drugs for the treatment of psoriasis in a public health system

    Full text link
    OBJECTIVE To analyze the access and utilization profile of biological medications for psoriasis provided by the judicial system in Brazil. METHODS This is a cross-sectional study. We interviewed a total of 203 patients with psoriasis who were on biological medications obtained by the judicial system of the State of Sao Paulo, from 2004 to 2010. Sociodemographics, medical, and political-administrative characteristics were complemented with data obtained from dispensation orders that included biological medications to treat psoriasis and the legal actions involved. The data was analyzed using an electronic data base and shown as simple variable frequencies. The prescriptions contained in the lawsuits were analyzed according to legal provisions. RESULTS A total of 190 lawsuits requesting several biological drugs (adalimumab, efalizumab, etanercept, and infliximab) were analyzed. Patients obtained these medications as a result of injunctions (59.5%) or without having ever demanded biological medication from any health institution (86.2%), i.e., public or private health services. They used the prerogative of free legal aid (72.6%), even though they were represented by private lawyers (91.1%) and treated in private facilities (69.5%). Most of the patients used a biological medication for more than 13 months (66.0%), and some patients were undergoing treatment with this medication when interviewed (44.9%). Approximately one third of the patients discontinued treatment due to worsening of their illness (26.6%), adverse drug reactions (20.5%), lack of efficacy, or because the doctor discontinued this medication (13.8%). None of the analyzed medical prescriptions matched the legal prescribing requirements. Clinical monitoring results showed that 70.3% of the patients had not undergone laboratory examinations (blood work, liver and kidney function tests) for treatment control purposes. CONCLUSIONS The plaintiffs resorted to legal action to get access to biological medications because they were either unaware or had difficulty in accessing them through institutional public health system procedures. Access by means of legal action facilitated long-term use of this type of medication through irregular prescriptions and led to a high rate of adverse drug reactions as well as inappropriate clinical monitoring

    National Psoriasis Foundation COVID-19 Task Force guidance for management of psoriatic disease during the pandemic: Version 2—Advances in psoriatic disease management, COVID-19 vaccines, and COVID-19 treatments

    Get PDF
    This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.Objective To update guidance regarding the management of psoriatic disease during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study Design The task force (TF) includes 18 physician voting members with expertise in dermatology, rheumatology, epidemiology, infectious diseases, and critical care. The TF was supplemented by nonvoting members, which included fellows and National Psoriasis Foundation staff. Clinical questions relevant to the psoriatic disease community were informed by inquiries received by the National Psoriasis Foundation. A Delphi process was conducted. Results The TF updated evidence for the original 22 statements and added 5 new recommendations. The average of the votes was within the category of agreement for all statements, 13 with high consensus and 14 with moderate consensus. Limitations The evidence behind many guidance statements is variable in quality and/or quantity. Conclusions These statements provide guidance for the treatment of patients with psoriatic disease on topics including how the disease and its treatments affect COVID-19 risk, how medical care can be optimized during the pandemic, what patients should do to lower their risk of getting infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (including novel vaccination), and what they should do if they develop COVID-19. The guidance is a living document that is continuously updated by the TF as data emerge

    National Psoriasis Foundation COVID-19 Task Force Guidance for Management of Psoriatic Disease During the Pandemic: Version 1

    Get PDF
    Objective To provide guidance about management of psoriatic disease during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Study design A task force (TF) of 18 physician voting members with expertise in dermatology, rheumatology, epidemiology, infectious diseases, and critical care was convened. The TF was supplemented by nonvoting members, which included fellows and National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF) staff. Clinical questions relevant to the psoriatic disease community were informed by questions received by the NPF. A Delphi process was conducted. Results The TF approved 22 guidance statements. The average of the votes was within the category of agreement for all statements. All guidance statements proposed were recommended, 9 with high consensus and 13 with moderate consensus. Limitations The evidence behind many guidance statements is limited in quality. Conclusion These statements provide guidance for the management of patients with psoriatic disease on topics ranging from how the disease and its treatments impact COVID-19 risk and outcome, how medical care can be optimized during the pandemic, what patients should do to lower their risk of getting infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and what they should do if they develop COVID-19. The guidance is intended to be a living document that will be updated by the TF as data emerge
    • …
    corecore